In the United Kingdom (UK) over the last 10 years, there has been a significant increase in the use of vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) rather than conventional Hawley retainers. There are currently no data to compare the cost-effectiveness of this change in practice. The two aims of this study were to compare (1) the cost-effectiveness of VFRs and Hawley retainers over 6 months, from the perspective of the National Health Service, orthodontic practice, and the patient and (2) patient satisfaction in the two retainer groups. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was carried out in a specialist orthodontic practice. Three hundred and ninety-seven eligible patients were randomized to one of two retainer groups, and followed up for 6 months. All subjects were invited to complete patient satisfaction questionnaires. Additional data were collected for the cost analysis from the patient records and national databases. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were used to compare patient satisfaction between retainer groups. In all, 196 subjects were randomized to the Hawley group (mean age 14 years 8 months, 63 per cent female, 37 per cent male) and 201 to the VFR group (mean age 15 years, 59 per cent female, 41 per cent male). VFRs were more cost-effective than Hawley retainers from all perspectives. The majority of subjects showed a preference for VFRs compared with Hawley retainers. There were also fewer breakages than in the Hawley group.
The aim of this study was to determine whether there was any difference in the degree of enamel loss at bond-up, debond and enamel clean-up when two different adhesive systems were tested and with four different methods of enamel clean-up. The adhesive systems were 37 per cent o-phosphoric acid with Transbond XT (group 1) and 10 per cent poly(acrylic acid) conditioner with Fuji Ortho LC (group 2). Using flattened enamel specimens, enamel loss at each stage was determined using a planer surfometer. These stages were: prior to treatment, at pumice prophylaxis, following enamel etching or conditioning and following enamel clean-up. The four clean-up methods were a high-speed tungsten carbide bur, a slow-speed tungsten carbide bur, an ultrasonic scaler and debanding pliers. The results, analysed using non-parametric tests, demonstrated that significantly more enamel loss occurred following the use of 37 per cent o-phosphoric acid than poly(acrylic acid) conditioner (P = 0.001). At debond and prior to clean-up, more adhesive remained on the enamel surface in group 1 than in group 2 (P = 0.005). During the subsequent enamel clean-up and with both adhesive systems, the least enamel loss occurred following the use of the slow-speed tungsten carbide bur and the greatest loss was seen with the ultrasonic scaler or high-speed tungsten carbide bur.Overall, the lowest enamel loss was observed with the poly(acrylic acid) conditioner and Fuji Ortho LC system (group 2) and where enamel clean-up was performed using the slow-speed tungsten carbide bur.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.