RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: A multicenter parallel 3-arm randomized clinical trial was carried out in 3 university hospitals in the United Kingdom to investigate the effect of supplemental vibratory force on space closure and treatment outcome with fixed appliances. METHODS: Eighty-one subjects less than 20 years of age with mandibular incisor irregularity undergoing extraction-based fixed appliance treatment were randomly allocated to supplementary (20 minutes/day) use of an intraoral vibrational device (AcceleDent; OrthoAccel Technologies, Houston, Tex) (n = 29), an identical nonfunctional (sham) device (n = 25), or fixed-appliance only (n = 27). Space closure in the mandibular arch was measured from dental study casts taken at the start of space closure, at the next appointment, and at completion of space closure. Final records were taken at completion of treatment. Data were analyzed blindly on a per-protocol basis with descriptive statistics, 1-way analysis of variance, and linear regression modeling with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Sixty-one subjects remained in the trial at start of space closure, with all 3 groups comparable for baseline characteristics. The overall median rate of initial mandibular arch space closure (primary outcome) was 0.89 mm per month with no difference for either the AcceleDent group (difference, -0.09 mm/month; 95% CI, -0.39 to 0.22 mm/month; P = 0.57) or the sham group (difference, -0.02 mm/month; 95% CI, -0.32 to 0.29 mm/month; P = 0.91) compared with the fixed only group. Similarly, no significant differences were identified between groups for secondary outcomes, including overall treatment duration (median, 18.6 months; P >0.05), number of visits (median, 12; P >0.05), and percentage of improvement in the Peer Assessment Rating (median, 90.0%; P >0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Supplemental vibratory force during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances does not affect space closure, treatment duration, total number of visits, or final occlusal outcome. REGISTRATION: NCT02314975. PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement. FUNDING: AcceleDent units were donated by OrthoAccel Technologies; no contribution to the conduct or the writing of this study was made by the manufacturer.
Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/métodos , Vibración/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Análisis de Varianza , Niño , Arco Dental , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Maloclusión/clasificación , Mandíbula , Aparatos Ortodóncicos , Soportes Ortodóncicos , Alambres para Ortodoncia , Factores de Tiempo , Extracción Dental , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/efectos adversos , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/instrumentación , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino UnidoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: A multicenter parallel 3-arm randomized clinical trial was carried out in 1 university and 2 district hospitals in the United Kingdom to investigate the effect of supplemental vibrational force on orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) during the alignment phase of fixed appliance therapy. METHODS: Eighty-one subjects less than 20 years old with mandibular incisor irregularity undergoing extraction-based fixed-appliance treatment were randomly allocated to supplementary (20 minutes a day) use of an intraoral vibrational device (AcceleDent; OrthoAccel Technologies, Houston, Tex) (n = 29), an identical nonfunctional (sham) device (n = 25), or fixed appliances only (n = 27). OIIRR was measured blindly from long-cone periapical radiographs of the maxillary right central incisor taken at the start of treatment and the end of alignment when a 0.019 × 0.025-in stainless steel archwire was placed (mean follow-up, 201.6 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 188.6-214.6 days). Data were analyzed blindly on a per-protocol basis because losses to follow-up were minimal, with descriptive statistics, 1-way analysis of variance, and univariable and multivariable regression modeling. RESULTS: Nine patients were excluded from the analysis; they were evenly distributed across the groups. Mean overall OIIRR measured among the 72 patients was 1.08 mm (95% CI, 0.89-1.27 mm). Multivariable regression indicated no significant difference in OIIRR for the AcceleDent (difference, 0.22 mm; 95% CI, -0.14-0.72; P = 0.184) and AcceleDent sham groups (difference, 0.29 mm; 95% CI, -0.15-0.99; P = 0.147) compared with the fixed-appliance-only group, after accounting for patient sex, age, malocclusion, extraction pattern, alignment time, maximum pain experienced, history of dentoalveolar trauma, and initial root length of the maxillary right central incisor. No other side-effects were recorded apart from pain and OIIRR. CONCLUSIONS: The use of supplemental vibrational force during the alignment phase of fixed appliance orthodontic treatment does not affect OIIRR associated with the maxillary central incisor. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02314975). PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement. FUNDING: Functional and sham AcceleDent units were donated by the manufacturer; there was no contribution to the conduct or the writing of this study.
Asunto(s)
Resorción Radicular/etiología , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/métodos , Vibración/uso terapéutico , Adolescente , Niño , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Resorción Radicular/prevención & control , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/efectos adversos , Técnicas de Movimiento Dental/instrumentación , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
This prospective randomized trial investigated the effect of supplemental vibrational force on orthodontic pain during alignment with fixed-appliances. Eighty-one subjects < 20 years-old undergoing extraction-based fixed-appliance treatment were randomly allocated to supplementary (20-minutes/day) use of an intra-oral vibrational device (AcceleDent(®)) (n = 29); an identical non-functional (sham) device (n = 25) or fixed-appliances only (n = 27). Each subject recorded pain intensity (using a 100-mm visual-analogue scale) and intake of oral analgesia in a questionnaire, following appliance-placement (T1) and first-adjustment (T2) for 1-week (immediately-after, 4, 24, 72-hours and at 1-week). Mean maximum-pain for the total sample was 72.96 mm [SD 21.59; 95%CI 68.19-77.74 mm] with no significant differences among groups (P = 0.282). Subjects taking analgesics reported slightly higher maximum-pain although this was not significant (P = 0.170). The effect of intervention was independent of analgesia (P = 0.883). At T1 and T2, a statistically and clinically significant increase in mean pain was seen at 4 and 24-hours, declining at 72-hours and becoming insignificant at 1-week. For mean alignment-rate, pain-intensity and use of analgesics, no significant differences existed between groups (P > 0.003). The only significant predictor for mean pain was time. Use of an AcceleDent vibrational device had no significant effect on orthodontic pain or analgesia consumption during initial alignment with fixed appliances.