Pain Perception and Rate of Canine Retraction Through Self- Ligating Brackets and Conventional Elastomeric Ligation System: A Split Mouth Study

Irfan  Qamruddin; Asma Gul  Khan; Fatima Muhmmad  Asif; Meanaz  Karim; Shifat A.  Nowrin; Fazal  Shahid; Mohammad Khursheed  Alam

Authors

Irfan Qamruddin
Asma Gul Khan
Fatima Muhmmad Asif
Meanaz Karim
Shifat A. Nowrin
Fazal Shahid
Mohammad Khursheed Alam

Keywords:

Orthodontics, Tooth Movement Techniques, Orthodontic Brackets

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the rate of tooth movement and the pain perception via self-ligating (SL) and conventional elastomeric ligation brackets (CB) system. Material and Methods: This study has been conducted at the Orthodontic Department of Baqai Dental College, Baqai Medical University. The sample size of this study comprised 40 patients, falling between the age of 12-30 years without any sex discrimination. Shapiro-Wilk was used to check the distribution of data. Non-parametric Mann Whitney U test was applied to evaluate the pain associated with SL and CB brackets system. To analysis the canine retraction Wilcoxon test was applied for the comparison of CB and SL brackets system. For all statistical analyses, the p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results: Pain level associated with retraction via CB and SL shows significant differences. However, the rate of canine retraction via CB and SL shows no significant differences at stages T0-T1 and T1-T2. However, stage T2-T3 shows a significant difference. Conclusion: As pain during orthodontic treatment is mostly associated with the level of compression of the periodontal ligament, it may be hypothesized that lower frictional forces generate less compression of the periodontal ligament and blood vessels, and so alter the type of pain experienced.

References

Westley H. Risks and complications in orthodontic treatment. Dent Nurs 2010; 6(6):318-21. https://doi.org/10.12968/denn.2010.6.6.48172

Proffit WR, Fields Jr HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 5th. ed. London: Elsevier Health Sciences, 2012.

Fleming P, Dibiase A, Sarri G, Lee R. Pain experience during initial alignment with a self-ligating and a conventional fixed orthodontic appliance system: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Angle Orthod 2009; 79(1):46-50. https://doi.org/10.2319/121007-579.1

Meling TR, Ødegaard J, Holthe K, Segner D. The effect of friction on the bending stiffness of orthodontic beams: a theoretical and in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 112(1):41-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(97)70272-5

Tagawa D. The damon system vs. conventional appliances: a comparative study. Clin Impress. 2006;15(1):4-9.

Kafle D, Rajbhandari A. Anticipated pain and pain experience among orthodontic patients: is there any difference? Kath Uni Med J 2013; 10(2):71-3. https://doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v10i2.7348

Krishnan V. Orthodontic pain: from causes to management - a review. Euro J Orthod 2007; 29(2):170-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjl081

Kluemper GT, Hiser DG, Rayens MK, Jay MJ. Efficacy of a wax containing benzocaine in the relief of oral mucosal pain caused by orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 122(4):359-65. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.126405

Keim RG. Managing orthodontic pain. J Clin Orthod 2004; 38(12):641-2.

Doshi-Mehta G, Bhad-Patil WA. Efficacy of low-intensity laser therapy in reducing treatment time and orthodontic pain: A clinical investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 141(3):289-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.09.009

Bertl MH, Onodera K, Celar AG. A prospective randomized split-mouth study on pain experience during chairside archwire manipulation in self-ligating and conventional brackets. Angle Orthod 2012; 83(2):292-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/042312-338.1

Türkkahraman H, Sayın M, Bozkurt FY, Yetkin Z, Kaya S, Önal S. Archwire ligation techniques, microbial colonization, and periodontal status in orthodontically treated patients. Angle Orthod 2005; 75(2):231-6.

Burstone CJ. The Biomechanics of Tooth Movement. in: BS Kraus, RA Riedel (Eds.) Vistas in Orthodontics. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1962. pp. 197-213.

Heo W, Baek SH. Friction properties according to vertical and horizontal tooth displacement and bracket type during initial leveling and alignment. Angle Orthod 2011; 81(4):653-61. https://doi.org/10.2319/072310-431.1

Matarese G, Nucera R, Militi A, Mazza M, Portelli M, Festa F, et al. Evaluation of frictional forces during dental alignment: an experimental model with 3 nonleveled brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 133(5):708-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.021

Pringle AM, Petrie A, Cunningham SJ, McKnight M. Prospective randomized clinical trial to compare pain levels associated with 2 orthodontic fixed bracket systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136(2):160-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.032

Scott P, DiBiase AT, Sherriff M, Cobourne MT. Alignment efficiency of damon3 self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems: A randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 134(4):470.e1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.04.018.

Fleming PS, Johal A. Self-ligating brackets in orthodontics. a systematic review. Angle Orthod 2010; 80(3):575-84. https://doi.org/10.2319/081009-454.1.

Miles PG. Self-ligating vs conventional twin brackets during en-masse space closure with sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132(2):223-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.04.028

Mezomo M, de Lima ES, de Menezes LM, Weissheimer A, Allgayer S. Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets: a randomized clinical trial. Angle Orthod 2011; 81(2):292-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/062510-348.1

Damon D. The rationale, evolution and clinical application of the self-ligating bracket. Clin Orthod Res 1998; 1(1):52- 61. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.1998.1.1.52

Eberting JJ, Straja SR, Tuncay OC. Treatment time, outcome, and patient satisfaction comparisons of damon and conventional brackets. Clin Orthod Res 2001; 4(4):228-34. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0544.2001.40407.x

Harradine NW. Self-ligating brackets: where are we now? J Orthod 2003; 30(3):262-73. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho/30.3.262

Rinchuse DJ, Miles PG. Self-ligating brackets: present and future. Clin Orthod Res 2007; 132(2):216-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.018

Swartz ML. Fact or friction: the clinical relevance of in vitro steady-state friction studies. J Clin Orthod. 2007; 41(8):427-32.

Permata DW, Purwanegara MK, Purbiati M. Soft tissue changes after orthodontic anterior retraction in adult indonesian patients with the dolichofacial type. J Int Dent Med Res 2018; 11(2):414-9.

Soegiharto BM. The comparison of space closure rate between conventional and passive self-ligating system using elastomeric chain in maxilla. J Int Dent Med Res 2016; 9:356-61.