Fatih Celebi1, Tamer Turk2, Ali Altug Bicakci3. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey. Electronic address: fatihcelebi5860@gmail.com. 2. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. 3. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of mechanical vibration and low-level laser therapy on orthodontic pain after placement of the initial archwire. METHODS:Sixty subjects with 3-6 mm maxillary dental crowding, a nonextraction fixed treatment plan, and no medical history were included in this study. The subjects were randomly divided into 3 groups, equally distributed by sex. In each subject, preadjusted edgewise appliances were placed in the maxillary arch from the left first molar to the right first molar, and a 0.014-inch round nickel-titanium archwire was fully engaged with elastomeric ties and cut at the end of first molar bondable tube. In group 1 (mean age 13.98 ± 2.68 y), mechanical vibration was performed 3 times: immediately, 24 hours, and 48 hours after engagement of the initial archwire. In group 2 (mean age 14.86 ± 2.06 y), low-level laser therapy was applied once: immediately after the insertion of the initial archwire. Group 3 (mean age 14.41 ± 1.78 y) served as the control group. Pain scores were determined with the use of a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Although no statistically significant differences were found among the groups (P >0.05), the mean VAS scores for the mechanical vibration group were consistently lower than those of the control and low-level laser therapy groups at all measured time points. CONCLUSIONS: The mechanical vibration group had lower, though nonsignificant, VAS scores for all measured time points. Additional clinical trials are recommended for more definitive conclusions.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of mechanical vibration and low-level laser therapy on orthodontic pain after placement of the initial archwire. METHODS: Sixty subjects with 3-6 mm maxillary dental crowding, a nonextraction fixed treatment plan, and no medical history were included in this study. The subjects were randomly divided into 3 groups, equally distributed by sex. In each subject, preadjusted edgewise appliances were placed in the maxillary arch from the left first molar to the right first molar, and a 0.014-inch round nickel-titanium archwire was fully engaged with elastomeric ties and cut at the end of first molar bondable tube. In group 1 (mean age 13.98 ± 2.68 y), mechanical vibration was performed 3 times: immediately, 24 hours, and 48 hours after engagement of the initial archwire. In group 2 (mean age 14.86 ± 2.06 y), low-level laser therapy was applied once: immediately after the insertion of the initial archwire. Group 3 (mean age 14.41 ± 1.78 y) served as the control group. Pain scores were determined with the use of a visual analog scale (VAS). RESULTS: Although no statistically significant differences were found among the groups (P >0.05), the mean VAS scores for the mechanical vibration group were consistently lower than those of the control and low-level laser therapy groups at all measured time points. CONCLUSIONS: The mechanical vibration group had lower, though nonsignificant, VAS scores for all measured time points. Additional clinical trials are recommended for more definitive conclusions.