arrow
返回

Recommendations for clear aligner therapy using digital or plaster study casts

delete2018-07-19
delete11
delete
OA
AI
H
Hsiu-Ching Ko *
W
Weitao Liu
D
Derek Hou
S
Sepideh Torkan
C
Charles Spiekerman
G
Greg J. Huang
DOI:10.1186/s40510-018-0224-2delete
delete原文链接
delete分享
delete收藏
查看原文
摘要

摘要

En 中文
Background: Clear aligner therapy has evolved considerably since its introduction 20 years ago. Clinicians have become more experienced with aligner therapy, but little is known about the types of malocclusions that clinicians currently treat with aligners. Similarly, it is not known if viewing digital vs plaster models has any impact on the treatment planning process for aligners. The aim of this study was to assess which types of malocclusions are recommended for treatment with clear aligners, and also to determine if recommendations for aligner treatment differed when using digital versus plaster models. Methods: Sixteen orthodontists treatment planned 20 cases at two time points with either the same or different model formats (digital versus plaster). As part of the treatment planning process, they were asked whether each patient was a good candidate for Invisalign (R) treatment, and if not, why. Generalized estimating equations regression (GEE), the permutation test, and a logistic regression model with GEE were used to analyze the data. Results: No significant difference was found between the Invisalign (R) choices in the digital model group and those in the plaster model group at T1 (p = 0.59). There was no significant difference between the agreement rate of the different formats group and that of the same format group (p = 0.97). Cases with extractions had less Invisalign (R) recommendations (15%) compared to cases with no extractions (55%) (p = 0.0015). Cases with surgery had less Invisalign (R) recommendations (29%) compared to cases with no surgery (57%) (p = 0.035). Conclusions: In this study, viewing orthodontic records with digital versus plaster models did not influence decisions about Invisalign (R) recommendations. Additionally, the orthodontists in this study tended to not recommend Invisalign (R) for extraction cases, surgical cases, or difficult cases.
Keyword:
TOOTH MOVEMENT
GRADING SYSTEM
ACCURACY
INVISALIGN
DECISIONS
EFFICACY
MODELS
AI总结

AI总结

对已上传原文的论文进行重点信息的提取,主要内容包括:简要概述、研究摘要、背景介绍、关键亮点、图文解析、展望与总结。

期刊

Progress in Orthodontics 封面图
Progress in Orthodontics
IF:
5
论文数:
567
被引数:
2.4K

机构

U
University of Washington
学者数:
8.0W
论文数: 7.0W
被引数: 12.5W
引用论文

引用论文

err分享
err收藏
err分享
err收藏
Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review透明矫正器控制正畸牙齿移动的有效性: 系统评价
err2014-11-20
err522
errOAAI
errRossini, Gabriele; Parrini, Simone; Castroflorio, Tommaso; Deregibus, Andrea; Debernardi, Cesare L.
err分享
err收藏
DEXTRINS IN BREWING
err2013-04-09
err0
PREAI
errBent Stig Enevoldsen; Finn Schmidt
err分享
err收藏
A Nonlethal Murine Cutaneous Model of Invasive Aspergillosis
err2012-01-02
err0
PREAI
errRonen Ben-Ami; Dimitrios P. Kontoyiannis
err分享
err收藏
Biomechanical analysis of bone remodeling following mandibular reconstruction using fibula free flap
err2018-06-01
err0
errOAAI
errNobuhiro Yoda; Keke Zheng; Junning Chen; Zhipeng Liao; Shigeto Koyama; Christopher Peck; Michael Swain; Keiichi Sasaki; Qing Li
err分享
err收藏
学者 查看更多内容