Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39346309›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024

Evaluation of Orthodontic Retention Protocols and Their Impact on Treatment Stability: Insights from a Tertiary Care Study.

Biswaroop Mohanty, Preetham Ravuri, Ajay K Kubavat, Afreen Kauser, Shital Bansilal Wagh, Praveen Kumar Varma Datla, Priyanka R Pujari, Leela Venkata Soujanya Nallamilli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Biswaroop MohantyDepartment of Orthodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental Sciences, K.I.I.T University, Odisha, India.
Preetham RavuriDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.
Ajay K KubavatDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.
Afreen KauserDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.
Shital Bansilal WaghDepartment of Prosthodontics, MIDSR Dental College, Latur, Maharashtra, India.
Praveen Kumar Varma DatlaDepartment of Orthodontics, Vishnu Dental College, Vishnupur, Bhimavaram, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Priyanka R PujariBDS, SMBT Dental College and Hospital, Amrutnagar Ghulewadi, Sangamner, Maharashtra, India.
Leela Venkata Soujanya NallamilliDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College and Hospital, Sankalchand Patel University, Visnagar, Gujarat, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: The goals of orthodontic therapy are to provide stable treatment results and the best possible tooth alignment. Orthodontic retention regimens are essential for avoiding relapses after treatment; however, there is ongoing discussion on the best regimen. Methods: Orthodontic patients treated at a tertiary care center were the subject of a retrospective analysis. Information was gathered about follow-up evaluations, treatment techniques, patient demographics, and retention procedures. Relapse rates and occlusal characteristics were among the objective variables used to evaluate treatment stability. A statistical analysis evaluated the effectiveness of various retention strategies. Findings: When it came to preserving treatment stability, fixed retainers outperformed detachable appliances, Hawley retainers, and Essix retainers. The mean changes in occlusal parameters and relapse rates were greater for removable appliances, but the performance of Hawley and Essix retainers was moderate. Significant variations in retention techniques were verified by statistical analysis, with fixed retainers outperforming alternative detachable retainers and removable appliances. In conclusion, compared to alternative detachable retainers and removable equipment, fixed retainers are more successful in preserving treatment stability. Retention protocols, however, must to be established with each patient's needs and treatment preferences in mind. The length of patient compliance and retention has a crucial role in determining the stability of therapy, underscoring the significance of patient education and continued monitoring. To improve long-term treatment results and optimize orthodontic retention techniques, further research and technical developments are required.

Indexed as

Detachable appliancesfixed retainersorthodontic treatmentretention regimenstreatment stability

Identifiers

PMID39346309
PMCPMC11426598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.