Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial

The aim of this trial was to compare two different orthodontic retention regimens: is night-only wear of upper and lower Hawley retainers for 1 year as effective as 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only wear? Sixty-seven consecutive patients attending for orthodontic debond were randoml...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of orthodontics 2010-04, Vol.32 (2), p.165-170
Hauptverfasser: Shawesh, M., Bhatti, B., Usmani, T., Mandall, N.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 170
container_issue 2
container_start_page 165
container_title European journal of orthodontics
container_volume 32
creator Shawesh, M.
Bhatti, B.
Usmani, T.
Mandall, N.
description The aim of this trial was to compare two different orthodontic retention regimens: is night-only wear of upper and lower Hawley retainers for 1 year as effective as 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only wear? Sixty-seven consecutive patients attending for orthodontic debond were randomly allocated to wear upper and lower Hawley retainers either for 1 year night-only (group 1) or for 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only (group 2). In group 1, 41.2 per cent were males and 58.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.6 years [standard deviation (SD) 1.6 years]. In group 2, 24.2 per cent were males and 75.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.8 years (SD 1.2 years). Study models were taken at the start (T0) and end (T1) of treatment and 1 year post-debond (T2). Digital callipers were used to measure upper and lower labial segment irregularity using Little’s index and upper and lower labial segment crowding. To evaluate differences between groups 1 and 2 t-tests were used. There were no statistically significant differences between the two retention regimens at T2 for labial segment irregularity or crowding (P > 0.05). Since both retention regimens were equally effective during the 1 year retention period, it would seem clinically acceptable to ask patients to wear their retainers at night only.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/ejo/cjp082
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733300227</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733300227</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-833a24cc0adda28bd114ee272699d9a4436b52e345ff49ec6af92469da3d01703</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpF0E1LAzEQgOEgitaPiz9A9iYIq5OPbjYnLcVaRRRBQbyENJmF1OxuTbZo_fWutOhpGOZhDi8hxxTOKSh-gfP2ws4XULItMqCigJwxCttkAFTQfMhLuUf2U5oDAC-F3CV7VEklBaUDcjU1nwFXWcTO-AZjyqplCHnWxmxhYpd3vsbLbJRF07i29t_oMht8460JWRe9CYdkpzIh4dFmHpCXyfXzeJrfP97cjkf3ueUFdHnJuWHCWjDOGVbOHKUCkUlWKOWUEYIXsyFDLoZVJRTawlSKiUI5wx1QCfyAnK7_LmL7scTU6doniyGYBttl0pJzDsCY7OXZWtrYphSx0ovoaxNXmoL-Dab7YHodrMcnm7fLWY3un24K9SBfA586_Pq7m_iuC8nlUE9f3zR_mNw9Qb9M-A_HU3VW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733300227</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Shawesh, M. ; Bhatti, B. ; Usmani, T. ; Mandall, N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Shawesh, M. ; Bhatti, B. ; Usmani, T. ; Mandall, N.</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of this trial was to compare two different orthodontic retention regimens: is night-only wear of upper and lower Hawley retainers for 1 year as effective as 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only wear? Sixty-seven consecutive patients attending for orthodontic debond were randomly allocated to wear upper and lower Hawley retainers either for 1 year night-only (group 1) or for 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only (group 2). In group 1, 41.2 per cent were males and 58.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.6 years [standard deviation (SD) 1.6 years]. In group 2, 24.2 per cent were males and 75.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.8 years (SD 1.2 years). Study models were taken at the start (T0) and end (T1) of treatment and 1 year post-debond (T2). Digital callipers were used to measure upper and lower labial segment irregularity using Little’s index and upper and lower labial segment crowding. To evaluate differences between groups 1 and 2 t-tests were used. There were no statistically significant differences between the two retention regimens at T2 for labial segment irregularity or crowding (P &gt; 0.05). Since both retention regimens were equally effective during the 1 year retention period, it would seem clinically acceptable to ask patients to wear their retainers at night only.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0141-5387</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2210</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjp082</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19797411</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Child ; Dental Models ; Dentistry ; Episode of Care ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Malocclusion - therapy ; Night Care ; Orthodontic Retainers - utilization ; Orthodontics, Corrective - methods ; Prospective Studies ; Sample Size ; Secondary Prevention</subject><ispartof>European journal of orthodontics, 2010-04, Vol.32 (2), p.165-170</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-833a24cc0adda28bd114ee272699d9a4436b52e345ff49ec6af92469da3d01703</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-833a24cc0adda28bd114ee272699d9a4436b52e345ff49ec6af92469da3d01703</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19797411$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Shawesh, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhatti, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Usmani, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandall, N.</creatorcontrib><title>Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial</title><title>European journal of orthodontics</title><addtitle>Eur J Orthod</addtitle><description>The aim of this trial was to compare two different orthodontic retention regimens: is night-only wear of upper and lower Hawley retainers for 1 year as effective as 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only wear? Sixty-seven consecutive patients attending for orthodontic debond were randomly allocated to wear upper and lower Hawley retainers either for 1 year night-only (group 1) or for 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only (group 2). In group 1, 41.2 per cent were males and 58.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.6 years [standard deviation (SD) 1.6 years]. In group 2, 24.2 per cent were males and 75.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.8 years (SD 1.2 years). Study models were taken at the start (T0) and end (T1) of treatment and 1 year post-debond (T2). Digital callipers were used to measure upper and lower labial segment irregularity using Little’s index and upper and lower labial segment crowding. To evaluate differences between groups 1 and 2 t-tests were used. There were no statistically significant differences between the two retention regimens at T2 for labial segment irregularity or crowding (P &gt; 0.05). Since both retention regimens were equally effective during the 1 year retention period, it would seem clinically acceptable to ask patients to wear their retainers at night only.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Dental Models</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Episode of Care</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malocclusion - therapy</subject><subject>Night Care</subject><subject>Orthodontic Retainers - utilization</subject><subject>Orthodontics, Corrective - methods</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Sample Size</subject><subject>Secondary Prevention</subject><issn>0141-5387</issn><issn>1460-2210</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpF0E1LAzEQgOEgitaPiz9A9iYIq5OPbjYnLcVaRRRBQbyENJmF1OxuTbZo_fWutOhpGOZhDi8hxxTOKSh-gfP2ws4XULItMqCigJwxCttkAFTQfMhLuUf2U5oDAC-F3CV7VEklBaUDcjU1nwFXWcTO-AZjyqplCHnWxmxhYpd3vsbLbJRF07i29t_oMht8460JWRe9CYdkpzIh4dFmHpCXyfXzeJrfP97cjkf3ueUFdHnJuWHCWjDOGVbOHKUCkUlWKOWUEYIXsyFDLoZVJRTawlSKiUI5wx1QCfyAnK7_LmL7scTU6doniyGYBttl0pJzDsCY7OXZWtrYphSx0ovoaxNXmoL-Dab7YHodrMcnm7fLWY3un24K9SBfA586_Pq7m_iuC8nlUE9f3zR_mNw9Qb9M-A_HU3VW</recordid><startdate>20100401</startdate><enddate>20100401</enddate><creator>Shawesh, M.</creator><creator>Bhatti, B.</creator><creator>Usmani, T.</creator><creator>Mandall, N.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100401</creationdate><title>Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial</title><author>Shawesh, M. ; Bhatti, B. ; Usmani, T. ; Mandall, N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-833a24cc0adda28bd114ee272699d9a4436b52e345ff49ec6af92469da3d01703</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Dental Models</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Episode of Care</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malocclusion - therapy</topic><topic>Night Care</topic><topic>Orthodontic Retainers - utilization</topic><topic>Orthodontics, Corrective - methods</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Sample Size</topic><topic>Secondary Prevention</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Shawesh, M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bhatti, B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Usmani, T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mandall, N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of orthodontics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Shawesh, M.</au><au>Bhatti, B.</au><au>Usmani, T.</au><au>Mandall, N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial</atitle><jtitle>European journal of orthodontics</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Orthod</addtitle><date>2010-04-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>165</spage><epage>170</epage><pages>165-170</pages><issn>0141-5387</issn><eissn>1460-2210</eissn><abstract>The aim of this trial was to compare two different orthodontic retention regimens: is night-only wear of upper and lower Hawley retainers for 1 year as effective as 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only wear? Sixty-seven consecutive patients attending for orthodontic debond were randomly allocated to wear upper and lower Hawley retainers either for 1 year night-only (group 1) or for 6 months full-time followed by 6 months night-only (group 2). In group 1, 41.2 per cent were males and 58.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.6 years [standard deviation (SD) 1.6 years]. In group 2, 24.2 per cent were males and 75.8 per cent were females and their mean age was 15.8 years (SD 1.2 years). Study models were taken at the start (T0) and end (T1) of treatment and 1 year post-debond (T2). Digital callipers were used to measure upper and lower labial segment irregularity using Little’s index and upper and lower labial segment crowding. To evaluate differences between groups 1 and 2 t-tests were used. There were no statistically significant differences between the two retention regimens at T2 for labial segment irregularity or crowding (P &gt; 0.05). Since both retention regimens were equally effective during the 1 year retention period, it would seem clinically acceptable to ask patients to wear their retainers at night only.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>19797411</pmid><doi>10.1093/ejo/cjp082</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0141-5387
ispartof European journal of orthodontics, 2010-04, Vol.32 (2), p.165-170
issn 0141-5387
1460-2210
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733300227
source MEDLINE; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adolescent
Child
Dental Models
Dentistry
Episode of Care
Female
Humans
Male
Malocclusion - therapy
Night Care
Orthodontic Retainers - utilization
Orthodontics, Corrective - methods
Prospective Studies
Sample Size
Secondary Prevention
title Hawley retainers full- or part-time? A randomized clinical trial
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-24T08%3A36%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hawley%20retainers%20full-%20or%20part-time?%20A%20randomized%20clinical%20trial&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20orthodontics&rft.au=Shawesh,%20M.&rft.date=2010-04-01&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=165&rft.epage=170&rft.pages=165-170&rft.issn=0141-5387&rft.eissn=1460-2210&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/ejo/cjp082&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733300227%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733300227&rft_id=info:pmid/19797411&rfr_iscdi=true