Assessment of Insertion Torque of Mini-implant and Its Correlation with Primary Stability and Pain Levels in Orthodontic Patients

Sreenivasagan, Swapna; Subramanian, Aravind Kumar; Nivethigaa, B

doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2969

Cited by 14 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We observed a high pain score in the palatal region (36.29) followed by the mini-implants placed in the infrazygomatic crest region (31.8) and at the buccal shelf (30.35). The mini-implant placement in this region often requires a higher torque value due to the higher bone density and often experiences high levels of pain immediately postplacement [ 19 ]. In a cohort study, researchers had pointed out that the buccal placement of mini-implants is more painful than it finally is [ 8 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pain Perception Associated with Mini-Implants and Interventions for Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Survey

Sreenivasagan

Subramanian

Selvaraj

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Orthodontists use mini-implants temporarily as an effective mode of skeletal anchorage devices. The placement of mini-implants can cause pain and discomfort to the patients. Patients often develop swelling, and the pain could interfere with their daily activities. Practitioners tend to prescribe antibiotics and pain medication for management. Objectives. The main objectives of this study are to evaluate the pain perception and discomfort due to mini-implant placement experienced by the patient and evaluate the interventions for pain management commonly practiced among orthodontists. Materials and Methods. The study was designed as a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study. A total of 271 patients were assessed, for whom 625 mini-implants (ranging from 1.2 to 2 mm diameter and length 8-14 mm) were placed. Pain scores were assessed using the VAS and the “Faces” pain rating scale to collect data about discomfort in daily activity and function. Data was collected from 244 patients. A total of 155 orthodontists were questioned regarding the prescription of medications and the interventions for managing pain and adverse effects. Results. Average pain score among female subjects was 16.71 and among men was 13.5. The highest pain scores were recorded for palatal mini-implants with an average score of 36.29 and the least for interradicular mini-implants with an average score of 9.02. Among the subjects, 47.9% of them took analgesics, and the most commonly prescribed analgesics were paracetamol (39%). Swelling at the site is where the mini-implants were placed, and ulceration due to implants were commonly dealt with the excision of the surrounding soft tissue, composite placement, and palliative care with oral analgesic gels. Conclusion. Female subjects had more mini-implants placed, and female subjects had also given more pain scores than their male counterparts. Palatal mini-implants caused the highest pain, followed by mini-implants placed at the infrazygomatic crest and the buccal shelf region. Palatal mini-implants caused maximum discomfort during speech and eating, followed by the mini-implant in the buccal shelf and the infrazygomatic crest region that also caused difficulty in yawning and laughing. Infiltration anesthesia was commonly given for the placement of interradicular implants and extra-alveolar mini-implants. Paracetamol was the most prescribed by the orthodontists, and more than half the doctors did not regularly prescribe antibiotics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pain Perception Associated with Mini-Implants and Interventions for Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Survey

Sreenivasagan

Subramanian

Selvaraj

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and Y.N.). The availability of the required data (e.g., IT values) was confirmed and similar articles from the same research institutions were excluded, which narrowed them down to 11 articles [1,[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. These 11 articles, which fulfilled the eligibility criteria, were reextracted.…”

Section: Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A previous study used tapered, self-tapping, ϕ2.0 × 6 mm OASs, and reported ITs of 25.6 ± 5.5 Ncm [8], whereas another study used cylindrical, self-drilling, ϕ1.5 × 7 mm OASs in the maxillary buccal alveolar area and reported ITs of 6.0 ± 3.2 Ncm [9]. Thus, the IT values vary greatly with the placement method and OAS design (screw diameter, length, and tapered or cylindrical form) [1,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Therefore, clinicians may be hesitant to apply these values in practice.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal Insertion Torque for Orthodontic Anchoring Screw Placement: A Comprehensive Review

Uchida,

Namura,

Motoyoshi

2023

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The optimal insertion torque (IT) for orthodontic anchoring screws (OASs) was hypothesized to vary with OAS features and insertion methods. This review examines the indexed English literature, to determine the appropriate IT range for OAS success based on area of insertion and OAS features. Eleven original articles with OAS placement in humans including IT and success rate were selected and were used to evaluate the relationships among IT, success rates, screw design, and placement methods at different sites. The ITs and success rates ranged from 6.0 ± 3.2 to 15.7 ± 2.3 Ncm and from 62.5 to 100.0% in the upper and lower buccal alveolar areas, respectively. For the mid-palatal area, the range was 14.5 ± 1.6 to 25.6 ± 5.5 Ncm and 83.0 to 100.0%, respectively. ITs of 5–12 and 6–14 Ncm were found to be optimal for the commonly used φ1.5–1.7 mm OASs in the upper and lower interproximal areas, respectively. In the mid-palatal suture area, ITs of 11–16 and 20–25 Ncm were considered suitable for tapered φ1.5 mm and φ2.0 mm OASs, respectively. Although identified optimal IT ranges deserve the recommendations, care must be taken to monitor the IT during placement constantly.

show abstract

“…The centre of resistance of the maxillary six anterior teeth is located at 13.5 mm apical and 14.0 mm posterior to the incisal edge of the maxillary central incisors 10 . For bodily retraction to take place, the forces should pass through the center of resistance of the anterior teeth 11 . The line of action passing, below or above the center of resistance is an important factor when the retraction of the six anterior teeth needs to be taken into consideration 12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…10 For bodily retraction to take place, the forces should pass through the center of resistance of the anterior teeth. 11 The line of action passing, below or above the center of resistance is an important factor when the retraction of the six anterior teeth needs to be taken into consideration. 12 Therefore, vertical position of the mini-implant head and the height of anterior retraction hook should be considered to obtain the proper line of action.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of treatment effects during en‐masse retraction of upper anterior teeth placed using mini‐implants placed at infrazygomatic crest and interradicular sites: A randomized controlled trial

Sreenivasagan

Subramanian

Chae

2023

Orthod Craniofacial Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe objective of this prospective study was to examine the efficacy of posterior interradicular and infrazygomatic crest mini‐implants for en‐masse anterior retraction.MethodsThe 22 patients were divided into two groups. In group 1 (IZC n = 11), mini‐implants were placed in the infrazygomatic crests and in group 2 (IR, n = 11), mini‐implants were placed in the molar‐premolar interradicular sites. Soft tissue, skeletal, and dental treatment effects between two groups were compared using lateral cephalometric measurements.ResultsThe average angle between the cranial base and A point was 1.01 degrees (P = .004), and the linear distance between the upper incisor and A point was 2.67 to 5.2 millimetres (P = .00). In IZC group the maxillary incisor to the palatal plane moved upward by a mean of −5.20 mm (P = .059), whereas in IR group the incisor movement changed by −2.67 mm (P = .068). There was no significant difference between groups IZC and IR while comparing overall treatment changes on upper incisor position change, angle, and overjet.ConclusionsMini‐implants placed in between the molar and premolar as well as the infrazygomatic crest can withstand the deepening of the bite during retraction. Mini‐implants in IZC are capable of causing intrusion of the anterior teeth and preventing intrusion of the molars, thereby providing absolute anchoring in all planes. Placement of the mini‐implants in the infrazygomatic crest resulted in more linear retraction.

show abstract

Assessment of Insertion Torque of Mini-implant and Its Correlation with Primary Stability and Pain Levels in Orthodontic Patients

Cited by 14 publications

References 37 publications

Pain Perception Associated with Mini-Implants and Interventions for Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Survey

Pain Perception Associated with Mini-Implants and Interventions for Pain Management: A Cross-Sectional Questionnaire-Based Survey

Optimal Insertion Torque for Orthodontic Anchoring Screw Placement: A Comprehensive Review

Comparison of treatment effects during en‐masse retraction of upper anterior teeth placed using mini‐implants placed at infrazygomatic crest and interradicular sites: A randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About