1985
DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(85)90199-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Patient cooperation in treatment with removable appliances: A model of patient noncompliance with treatment implications

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
9
0
2

Year Published

1989
1989
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
1
9
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The parents' support was presented as a positive experience including nagging. This is in agreement with previous research (9,12,28) especially the study by Gross et al (1985) (28) who tested a reward programme for compliance, which seems to have a positive effect on parentchild relationships. Furthermore, additional outcome reveals the importance of both adolescents and parents participating in the treatment, making clear that the family, and not only the adolescent, is going to be responsible for its success.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…The parents' support was presented as a positive experience including nagging. This is in agreement with previous research (9,12,28) especially the study by Gross et al (1985) (28) who tested a reward programme for compliance, which seems to have a positive effect on parentchild relationships. Furthermore, additional outcome reveals the importance of both adolescents and parents participating in the treatment, making clear that the family, and not only the adolescent, is going to be responsible for its success.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Difficulty in obtaining an accurate preliminary impression may be encountered in patients suffering from movement disorders with orofacial manifestations, 28 for example, Parkinson's disease 29 . Lack of patient cooperation may hinder impression making, which can occur when treating uncooperative children, 30 geriatric patients with special needs, 22 or difficult denture patients 31 . Sectional impressions are indicated for patients with unfavorable oral anatomy, such as in irregularly resorbed edentulous arches, uneven location of teeth, or unusually small or large arches 18 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, a removable appliance is not suitable for correction of rotations or closure of large residual spaces 10) . A removable appliance also requires complete patient cooperation 3,4) . However, a removal appliance has several advantages over a fixed appliance: it is more economical, simpler to make, and provides more efficient anchorage 11) .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…a removable appliance requires complete patient cooperation 3,4) . That is, the effectiveness of treatment using a removable appliance is dependent on whether the patient uses the appliance continuously.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%