Pain and removal force associated with bracket debonding: a clinical study.
Journal
Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB
ISSN: 1678-7765
Titre abrégé: J Appl Oral Sci
Pays: Brazil
ID NLM: 101189774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
27
10
2020
accepted:
31
03
2021
entrez:
28
7
2021
pubmed:
29
7
2021
medline:
31
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pain is a problem during bracket removal, and more comfortable treatment is needed. This study examined the association of pain with the removal force required for ceramic brackets, compared with metal and plastic brackets, to determine which removal method resulted in less pain and discomfort. 81 subjects (mean age, 25.1 years; 25 males and 56 females) were enrolled, from whom 1,235 brackets (407 ceramic, 432 plastic, and 396 metal) were removed. Measured teeth were distinguished at six segments. Pain was measured with a visual analogue scale (VAS) during the removal of each bracket. An additional grip was placed on the grips of debonding pliers with right-angled beaks; a mini loading cell sensor pinched by the grips was used to measure removal force during debonding. VAS and force values were statistically analyzed. The Kruskal-Wallis test followed by the Mann-Whitney U test with Bonferroni correction were performed for multiple comparisons; multiple regression analysis was also performed. Forces in the upper and lower anterior segments were significantly smaller (p<0.05) than those in the other segments. Pain tended to be greater in the upper and lower anterior segments than in the posterior segments. In all segments, the removal force was greater for metal brackets than for plastic or ceramic brackets. Ceramic brackets caused significantly greater pain than plastic brackets for the upper and lower anterior segments. Debonding force was involved in the brackets, following adjustments for pain, upper left segment, age, and sex. Pain and discomfort are likely to occur during bracket debonding.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34320118
pii: S1678-77572021000100430
doi: 10.1590/1678-7757-2020-0879
pmc: PMC8315792
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e20200879Références
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Mar;131(3):384-90
pubmed: 17346595
Dent Mater J. 2011;30(5):642-7
pubmed: 21946484
Eur J Orthod. 1996 Aug;18(4):349-57
pubmed: 8921656
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Aug;150(2):220-7
pubmed: 27476354
Eur J Orthod. 2020 Jan 27;42(1):72-77
pubmed: 31009950
Semin Orthod. 1997 Sep;3(3):178-88
pubmed: 9573879
J Clin Dent. 1991;2(4):92-6
pubmed: 1812905
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992 Oct;102(4):373-81
pubmed: 1456222
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2021 May;24(2):268-276
pubmed: 33058419
Angle Orthod. 2016 Nov;86(6):917-924
pubmed: 27172508
Eur J Orthod. 2019 Sep 21;41(5):486-494
pubmed: 30934051
Dental Press J Orthod. 2014 Jan-Feb;19(1):77-85
pubmed: 24713563
World J Orthod. 2010 Winter;11(4):e29-34
pubmed: 21490985
J Orthod. 2013 Sep;40(3):188-96
pubmed: 24009318
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 May;137(5):615-622.e3
pubmed: 20451780
Eur J Orthod. 2009 Feb;31(1):84-9
pubmed: 19164413
Prog Orthod. 2015;16:17
pubmed: 26081783
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Apr;131(4):530-6
pubmed: 17418721
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992 Apr;101(4):313-7
pubmed: 1558060
Eur J Dent. 2018 Oct-Dec;12(4):602-609
pubmed: 30369810
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991 Oct;100(4):349-56
pubmed: 1927986
Eur J Orthod. 2007 Dec;29(6):564-70
pubmed: 17804426
Dent Mater J. 2009 Jul;28(4):419-25
pubmed: 19721278
Prog Orthod. 2019 Jul 8;20(1):26
pubmed: 31281954
Dental Press J Orthod. 2020 Sep-Oct;25(5):30-37
pubmed: 33206826
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 May;133(5):716-20
pubmed: 18456145