BackgroundProtraction facemask has been advocated for treatment of class III malocclusion with maxillary deficiency. Studies using tooth-borne rapid palatal expansion (RPE) appliance as anchorage have experienced side effects such as forward movement of the maxillary molars, excessive proclination of the maxillary incisors, and an increase in lower face height. A new Hybrid Hyrax bone-anchored RPE appliance claimed to minimize the side effects of maxillary expansion and protraction. A retrospective study was conducted to compare the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes in patients treated with these two protocols.MethodsTwenty class III patients (8 males, 12 females, mean age 9.8 ± 1.6 years) who were treated consecutively with the tooth-borne maxillary RPE and protraction device were compared with 20 class III patients (8 males, 12 females, mean age 9.6 ± 1.2 years) who were treated consecutively with the bone-anchored maxillary RPE and protraction appliances. Lateral cephalograms were taken at the start of treatment and at the end of maxillary protraction. A control group of class III patients with no treatment was included to subtract changes due to growth to obtain the true appliance effect. A custom cephalometric analysis based on measurements described by Bjork and Pancherz, McNamara, Tweed, and Steiner analyses was used to determine skeletal and dental changes. Data were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance.ResultsSignificant differences between the two groups were found in 8 out of 29 cephalometric variables (p < .05). Subjects in the tooth-borne facemask group had more proclination of maxillary incisors (OLp-Is, Is-SNL), increase in overjet correction, and correction in molar relationship. Subjects in the bone-anchored facemask group had less downward movement of the “A” point, less opening of the mandibular plane (SNL-ML and FH-ML), and more vertical eruption of the maxillary incisors.ConclusionsThe Hybrid Hyrax bone-anchored RPE appliance minimized the side effect encounter by tooth-borne RPE appliance for maxillary expansion and protraction and may serve as an alternative treatment appliance for correcting class III patients with a hyperdivergent growth pattern.

Concerns regarding pain constitute a large component of dental anxiety, and patients with high dental anxiety are likely to have exaggerated memory and prediction of dental pain. It remains to be investigated, however, if memory of anxiety is exaggerated in a manner similar to that of pain, and if anxiety and pain assimilate in memory over time. A sample of 79 patients presenting for emergency extraction rated their anxiety and pain before, during, and two weeks after the procedure. Measures of trait dental anxiety and fear of pain also were collected. All patients exaggerated their recall of procedure pain, but only those high in trait dental anxiety exaggerated their recall of anxiety. Highly anxious patients reported more pain prior to the procedure and expected more pain; ratings of anxiety and pain for all participants assimilated over time.

No abstract

Dental patients generally recall more pain than they originally report, with ratings of pain related to state anxiety and dental fear, but the role of depression in recall of dental pain remains uncertain. This study examined the relative contributions of different variables in explaining dental pain recalled after tooth extraction. Patients presenting for tooth extraction, prior to extraction, rated their current dental pain and state anxiety, prediction of pain and state anxiety during extraction, depression, and dental fear. Immediately postprocedure and then 1 mo later, patients rated their pain and state anxiety during extraction. Hierarchical linear regression equations were used to explain variance in recalled pain and state anxiety. In addition, patients were divided into high and low dental fear and depression groups and compared on ratings of pain and state anxiety across time. In a final sample of 157 patients, the most important predictors of recalled pain were pain reported during extraction (β = .53) and recalled state anxiety (β = .52). Dental fear and depression had a significant interaction: only when patients reported less depression did those patients who reported more dental fear also report more pain than patients who reported less dental fear (P < 0.05, ω(2) = .07). Patients who reported more depression entered the dental operatory reporting more pain, but all patients generally reported less pain during extraction than they predicted or recalled. Memory of state anxiety and pain reported during tooth extraction, not depression or state anxiety at the time of extraction, were critical factors in memory of the pain associated with the procedure. At higher levels of depression, patients higher and lower in dental fear did not differ in report of pain. Future studies are needed to further clarify interactions of depression and dental fear over time.

No abstract