Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances

被引:17
|
作者
Alansari, Reem A. [1 ]
机构
[1] King Abdulaziz Univ, Fac Dent, Dept Orthodont, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
来源
关键词
children; adolescents; preference; attractiveness; braces; CONVENTIONAL BRACKET; FACE;
D O I
10.2147/PPA.S257814
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Purpose: To explore youth perception of the esthetics of different orthodontic appliances measured using different concepts of esthetics. Patients and Methods: A questionnaire was answered by 194 youth participants (35.5% were 9-11 years old; 32.5% were 12-14 years old; and 32% were 15-17 years old). Participants evaluated and compared the attractiveness of images of different orthodontic appliances using a Likert scale. They indicated the acceptability of the appliances with a yes/no answer. They then chose which appliance to rank as their most preferred. Results: The highest median attractiveness rating was for clear aligners (Mdn= 8, IQR= 4.25), followed by lingual and standard ceramic brackets (Mdn= 7, IQR= 6). The lowest median attractiveness rating was for hybrid brackets (Mdn= 4, IQR= 4). Clear aligners were significantly more attractive than all other orthodontic appliances (P<0.0001). Clear aligners also had the highest percentage of acceptability (80%), while hybrid brackets scored the lowest (42%). Ceramic and metal brackets fell in the middle range of attractiveness and acceptability but were chosen by male middle schoolers as their preferred appliances. Clear aligners were ranked the highest by this cohort. Conclusion: This study demonstrates the widespread preference and acceptability of clear aligners among the youth. Other orthodontic appliances were acceptable but to a lesser extent than clear aligners. This study informs orthodontists about their youth consumers' behavior and may help inform treatment discussions in the orthodontic clinic.
引用
收藏
页码:1011 / 1019
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [22] AGE FOR APPLICATION OF ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES
    不详
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1946, 130 (12): : 826 - 826
  • [23] Orthodontic Treatment Provided by General Dentists with Different Types of Appliances in Chattishgarh, India
    Dhanyasi, Ashok Kumar
    Mahobia, Yogesh
    Agarwal, Abhay Prem Prakash
    Gupta, Akhil
    Quaraishi, Dilshad
    Khan, Kishwar Zahoor
    Agrawal, Anil
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, 2015, 9 (06) : ZC20 - ZC22
  • [24] Effect of different curing condition on material properties of acrylic resin for orthodontic appliances
    Machado, Cintia de Vasconcellos
    Fortes, Carmen Borges
    Collares, Fabricio Mezzomo
    de Camargo Forte, Maria Madalena
    Werner Samuel, Susana Maria
    [J]. ORTHODONTIC WAVES, 2010, 69 (01) : 18 - 22
  • [25] Awareness Regarding the Use of Different Types of Orthodontic Appliances among Undergraduate Students
    Varghese, Remmiya Mary
    Praneeksha
    [J]. JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MEDICAL AND DENTAL SCIENCE, 2022, 10 (05): : 134 - 137
  • [26] FORCE GENERATION FROM ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES
    GREIF, R
    COLTMAN, M
    GAILUS, M
    SHAPIRO, E
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICAL ENGINEERING-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 1982, 104 (04): : 280 - 289
  • [27] FIXED ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES: A PRACTICAL GUIDE
    Patel, Sameer
    [J]. BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL, 2020, 228 (09) : 668 - 668
  • [28] Impact of orthodontic appliances on sleep quality
    Rawji, Akbar
    Parker, Larry
    Deb, Prativa
    Woodside, Donald
    Tompson, Bryan
    Shapiro, Colin M.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2008, 134 (05) : 606 - 614
  • [29] DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF REMOVABLE ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES
    WADE, RE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY, 1965, 15 (03): : 586 - &
  • [30] Orthodontic appliances in patients allergic to nickel
    Lucarelli, D.
    Stabilini, A.
    De Filippis, A.
    D'Avola, V.
    Mainardi, E.
    Esposito, L.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL REGULATORS AND HOMEOSTATIC AGENTS, 2020, 34 (06): : 2375 - 2378