Dataset Information

Wearability and preference of mouthguard during sport in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: a randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Orthodontic patients wearing fixed appliances are susceptible to traumatic dental injuries during a wide range of sporting activities. This randomized clinical trial investigated wearability and preference of mouthguards during sporting activities in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances.

Methods

A prospective three-arm crossover randomized clinical trial conducted in the UK. Thirty patients in active orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances undertaking at least 120 minutes of contact sport per 6-8-week observation period were randomly assigned to one of six mouthguard allocation sequences consisting of three mouthguard types: (MG1) custom-made laboratory constructed, (MG2) mouth-formed OPRO® Gold Braces, and (MG3) pre-fabricated Shock Doctor® Single Brace. Patients completed a nine-outcome 100-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaire relating to mouthguard wearability during sport. Once feedback was completed, subjects were allocated the next mouthguard in the sequence. At study-end, subjects were asked to identify their preferred mouthguard.

Results

Twenty-four patients (median age = 13; inter-quartile range 12-14.5 years) completed n = 72 follow-up questionnaires with most playing rugby union or field hockey. Considering VAS score as a continuous variable, for comfort, stability, hardness, ability to breathe, ability to not cause nausea, and inclination to chew, MG2 performed better than MG3. For categorization of VAS score into low (less than 80 mm) or high (at least 80 mm) wearability, for comfort, stability, ability to not cause nausea, and inclination to chew, MG1 and MG2 also rated superior to MG3. Patients preferred MG1 overall.

Conclusions

This randomized clinical trial found that during contact sport patients in fixed appliances reported superior wearability for custom-made and mouth-formed mouthguards in comparison to pre-fabricated. Overall, patients preferred custom-made mouthguards.

Clinical trials registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04588831.

SUBMITTER: Kalra A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8789322 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:It is known that the presence of orthodontic brackets predisposes for a change in the biofilm, facilitating the development of gingivits. The sites are difficult to access with a toothbrush and periodontal curette, worsening inflammation, in addition, a gingival hyperplasia is associated with poor hygiene. The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of photodinamyc therapy (PDT) as an adjuvant treatment, considering clinical immunoregulatory and microbiological parameters. This randomized, controlled, double-blind clinical study will include 34 patients, both genders, having used fixed appliance for more than 12 months, with gingivitis. Participants will be divided into two groups: G1 (n = 17)- Scaling and Root Planing + PDT placebo and G2 (n = 17)- Scaling and Root Planing + PDT. In G2 the following dosimetric parameters will be used: methylene blue 0.005%, λ= 660 nanometers (nm), 9 Joules (J) per site, irradiance= 3.5Watts (W)/ centimeters (cm), radiant exposure= 318J/cm. All participants will receive oral hygiene guidance prior the curetes scaling. The clinical periodontal data to be analyzed are plaque index, gingival index and probing depth. Crevicular fluid, from 4 pre-determined sites and saliva, will be collected and analysed for IL-6, IL-1β, IL-8, TNF-α and IL-10 cytokines using ELISA (Enzyme immunoabsorption assay) method. Total Bacteria count will also be performed, by qPCR and Universal16SrRNA gene. All analysis will be realized using in the baseline (T0), 7 (T1) and 21 (T2) days after treatment. Oral health-related quality of life will be assessed using the OHIP-14 questionnaire at times T0 and T2. If sample distribution is normal, the Student T-test will be applied if it is not normal, the Mann-Whitney test will be used. The data will be presented in terms of ± PD and The significance level will be set at p < 0.05. Our results may improve quality of life and add data to establish a therapeutic alternative for gingivitis during the orthodontic treatment. Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT04037709. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04037709 - Registered in July 2019.

Project description:ObjectivesAdults with fixed orthodontic appliances are increasing nowadays. Compared with adolescents, adults present biological differences that might influence treatment duration. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents.Materials and methodsEight databases were searched up to September 2019 for randomized and non-randomized clinical studies comparing treatment duration with fixed appliances in adolescents and adult patients. After duplicate study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment with the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool, random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by assessment of the quality of evidence with GRADE.ResultsA total of 11 unique studies (one prospective and 10 retrospective non-randomized) with 2969 adolescents and 1380 adult patients were finally included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies found no significant difference in the duration of comprehensive treatment with fixed appliances (MD = - 0.8 month; 95% CI = - 4.2 to 2.6 months; P = 0.65; I2 = 92%) between adults and adolescents. Similarly, both distalization of upper first molars with skeletal anchorage for class II correction and the retraction of canines into the premolar extraction spaces lasted similarly long among adults and adolescents. On the other hand, alignment of palatally displaced canines lasted considerably longer in adults compared to adolescents (1 study; MD = 3.8 months; 95% CI = 1.4 to 6.2 months; P = 0.002). The quality of evidence for the meta-analysis was low due to the inclusion of non-randomized studies with considerable risk of bias.ConclusionsWhile existing evidence does not indicate a difference in the overall duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents, the alignment of palatally displaced canines lasted significantly longer in adults. However, our confidence in these estimates is low due to the risk of bias in the included studies.Trial registrationPROSPERO: ( CRD42019148169 ).