Applicative Characteristics of New Microelectronic Sensors Smart Retainer® and TheraMon® for Mea suring Wear Time

Objective: To evaluate the compliance of patients while wearing maxillary Hawley retainers embedded with SMART microsensors. Methods: The sample population consisted of 22 patients who were divided into an experimental (group A) and a control group (group B). Group A was informed that they would be monitored through the use of SMART microsensors, while group B was not informed that they would be monitored. After the delivery of the retainers (T0), the patients were evaluated at T1 and T2, represented by 6-and 12-week follow-up visits, respectively. At T1, group B was informed of our ability to monitor their compliance. Both groups continued wearing their retainers during T1 to T2. Results: During T0-T1, Group A wore their retainers for an average of 16.3 hours (SD 4.39), while group B wore their appliances for an average of 10.6 hours (SD 5.36, t 5 2.426, P 5 .027). Although group B increased their retainer wear by 0.5 hours/day from T1 to T2, this increase was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Despite significant differences being noted between the two groups at T1, group B did not show significant mean changes in their wear time before and after becoming aware of the use of the SMART microsensor. (Angle Orthod. 2015;85:263-269.)

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They did conclude, however, that both microsensors could be used as objective wear-time sensors in orthodontic appliances. 21 The reason that the SMART microsensor was used in our study is that the product is manufactured domestically and it is readily available in North America.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient compliance with Hawley retainers fitted with the SMART^®sensor:A prospective clinical pilot study

Hyun

Preston

Al-Jewair

et al. 2015

“…12 Therefore, different devices have been introduced to measure the objective wear time of removable appliances. [13][14][15][16] Most of these devices consist of a microsensor that is embedded in the appliances. Current versions of these devices deliver a clinically sufficient accuracy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Current versions of these devices deliver a clinically sufficient accuracy. 15 This permits an objective assessment of wear time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of wear time recording on the patient's compliance

Pauls¹,

Nienkemper²,

Panayotidis³

et al. 2013

Objective: To assess the effect of wear-time recording on subjective and objective wear time. Materials and Methods: This study retrospectively examined a group of 18 patients and a control group of 14 patients at four appointments over 168 days. The patients were treated with removable appliances with embedded TheraMon-microsensors to be worn for 15 hours per day. The study group was not told about the microsensor until the first appointment after fitting of the appliance. At each appointment patients were asked about their subjective wear time and afterward were told about the objective wear time. The existence of the microsensor was revealed to the control group when the appliance was fitted. Objective wear time was also announced at every appointment. Results: Mean wear times did not significantly differ between groups at any appointment or regarding overall wear time. Highly significant differences between subjective and objective wear time were found when patients did not know that their wear time had been monitored. Conclusion: Mean wear times assessed in this study concur with data of previous studies. Patients tend to overestimate their wear times but become more realistic once they know wear time is being monitored. Objective measurement of wear time allows a more realistic view of compliance by patient and orthodontist. Knowing that wear time is recorded does not necessarily increase the amount of time removable appliances are worn by the patient.

“…12 Among such sensors designed to monitor compliance objectively, [13][14][15][16] the TheraMon System (Dentaurum Italia Spa, Bologna, Italy) has proved to be particularly reliable, with a discrepancy between real and measured compliance of only 7.92 minutes per day. 17 The TheraMon micro sensor also has the added advantages of being especially small in size (13 3 9 3 4.5 mm; Figure 1). It works by measuring the temperature of its surroundings every 15 minutes, and the data it records are transmitted to a dedicated workstation by radiofrequency identification technology and displayed by proprietary software on a simple graph.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Objective assessment of compliance with intra- and extraoral removable appliances

Arreghini

Trigila

Lombardo

et al. 2016

Objective: To conduct an objective assessment of the level of compliance in young patients prescribed various types of removable appliances and to determine the influence of device type, treatment duration, and patient age, gender, psychological maturity, and awareness of monitoring on compliance. Materials and Methods: A total of 30 patients were fitted with either a class 2 (Frankel or bionator) or a class 3 (face mask) removable appliance, each bearing a compliance indicator chip, and they were instructed to wear them for 13 hours per day. Compliance was monitored by means of the sensor for an average of 8 months. Of the patients, 14 were informed that their appliance was fitted with a monitoring sensor, and 16 were not. The psychological maturity of all patients was assessed on the Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale, and the effect on compliance of this score as well as the patient-and treatment-related variables considered were determined via statistical analysis Results: The mean compliance recorded by the chips was 8.6 6 2.9 hours, far lower than the 13 hours prescribed, and younger patients showed significantly greater compliance than adolescents (P , .01). However, no significant differences in compliance were found between intra-and extraoral appliances, and neither gender, psychological scores, treatment duration, nor awareness of being monitored had any significant effect. Conclusions: Compliance is generally very poor in young patients, regardless of their gender and psychological maturity. Although awareness of monitoring does not appear to boost compliance, such systems may be a valuable means of providing a dentist with objective information regarding their patients' compliance. (Angle Orthod. 2017;87:88-95)