Cargando…

Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND: The aims of the study were to compare the effects of Invisalign® with and without Dental Monitoring® (DM) GoLive® on the following parameters: treatment duration, number of appointments, number of refinements, total number of refinement aligners, and time to initial refinement. The patie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hansa, Ismaeel, Semaan, Steven J., Vaid, Nikhilesh R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293972/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32537723
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00316-6
_version_ 1783546386889834496
author Hansa, Ismaeel
Semaan, Steven J.
Vaid, Nikhilesh R.
author_facet Hansa, Ismaeel
Semaan, Steven J.
Vaid, Nikhilesh R.
author_sort Hansa, Ismaeel
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aims of the study were to compare the effects of Invisalign® with and without Dental Monitoring® (DM) GoLive® on the following parameters: treatment duration, number of appointments, number of refinements, total number of refinement aligners, and time to initial refinement. The patients’ perspectives on Dental Monitoring® were also evaluated using an online questionnaire. A sample of 155 consecutively treated Invisalign® patients (67 control, 88 DM) fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: The two groups were homogeneous (P > .05) for age, gender, angle classification, Little’s Irregularity Index, and number of initial aligners. The DM group had significantly fewer office visits compared to the control (7.56 vs 9.82; P < .001). There were no significant differences between the DM and control groups respectively pertaining to treatment duration (14.58 vs 13.91), number of refinements (1.00 vs 0.79), number of refinement aligners (19.91 vs 19.85), and time to first refinement (9.46 vs 9.97). Questionnaire results showed that 68.8% (44 respondents) indicate that DM scans were “easy” or “very easy” to perform while 16 responders (25%) found it “difficult” or “very difficult.” 71.9% (46 responders) were “satisfied or very satisfied” with the level of communication with the orthodontist using DM and 16% (10 responders) were “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied.” The mean duration observed by patients to take a scan was 5.16 ± 3.6 min. Eighty-eight percent (56 responders) of patients prefer few office visits as possible, while 12% (8 responders) would actually prefer additional office visits. Overall, the mean satisfaction of patients with DM was 4.25 on the 5-point Likert scale. CONCLUSION: The DM group had a significantly reduced number of appointments (7.56) compared with the control group (9.82) (a reduction of 23%) over the treatment duration. There were no significant differences between the two groups in treatment duration, number of refinements, number of refinement aligners, or time to 1st refinement. Overall, DM was well received by patients. However, there was a small percentage (usually less than 15%) that was generally unsatisfied with DM in varying aspects and preferred more frequent, traditional office visits.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7293972
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-72939722020-06-19 Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study Hansa, Ismaeel Semaan, Steven J. Vaid, Nikhilesh R. Prog Orthod Research BACKGROUND: The aims of the study were to compare the effects of Invisalign® with and without Dental Monitoring® (DM) GoLive® on the following parameters: treatment duration, number of appointments, number of refinements, total number of refinement aligners, and time to initial refinement. The patients’ perspectives on Dental Monitoring® were also evaluated using an online questionnaire. A sample of 155 consecutively treated Invisalign® patients (67 control, 88 DM) fit the inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: The two groups were homogeneous (P > .05) for age, gender, angle classification, Little’s Irregularity Index, and number of initial aligners. The DM group had significantly fewer office visits compared to the control (7.56 vs 9.82; P < .001). There were no significant differences between the DM and control groups respectively pertaining to treatment duration (14.58 vs 13.91), number of refinements (1.00 vs 0.79), number of refinement aligners (19.91 vs 19.85), and time to first refinement (9.46 vs 9.97). Questionnaire results showed that 68.8% (44 respondents) indicate that DM scans were “easy” or “very easy” to perform while 16 responders (25%) found it “difficult” or “very difficult.” 71.9% (46 responders) were “satisfied or very satisfied” with the level of communication with the orthodontist using DM and 16% (10 responders) were “dissatisfied” or “very dissatisfied.” The mean duration observed by patients to take a scan was 5.16 ± 3.6 min. Eighty-eight percent (56 responders) of patients prefer few office visits as possible, while 12% (8 responders) would actually prefer additional office visits. Overall, the mean satisfaction of patients with DM was 4.25 on the 5-point Likert scale. CONCLUSION: The DM group had a significantly reduced number of appointments (7.56) compared with the control group (9.82) (a reduction of 23%) over the treatment duration. There were no significant differences between the two groups in treatment duration, number of refinements, number of refinement aligners, or time to 1st refinement. Overall, DM was well received by patients. However, there was a small percentage (usually less than 15%) that was generally unsatisfied with DM in varying aspects and preferred more frequent, traditional office visits. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7293972/ /pubmed/32537723 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00316-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research
Hansa, Ismaeel
Semaan, Steven J.
Vaid, Nikhilesh R.
Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title_full Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title_fullStr Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title_short Clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of Dental Monitoring® GoLive® with Invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
title_sort clinical outcomes and patient perspectives of dental monitoring® golive® with invisalign®—a retrospective cohort study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293972/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32537723
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00316-6
work_keys_str_mv AT hansaismaeel clinicaloutcomesandpatientperspectivesofdentalmonitoringgolivewithinvisalignaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT semaanstevenj clinicaloutcomesandpatientperspectivesofdentalmonitoringgolivewithinvisalignaretrospectivecohortstudy
AT vaidnikhileshr clinicaloutcomesandpatientperspectivesofdentalmonitoringgolivewithinvisalignaretrospectivecohortstudy