Cargando…

Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances

PURPOSE: To explore youth perception of the esthetics of different orthodontic appliances measured using different concepts of esthetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was answered by 194 youth participants (35.5% were 9–11 years old; 32.5% were 12–14 years old; and 32% were 15–17 years old)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Alansari, Reem A
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308181/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606617
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S257814
_version_ 1783548942722531328
author Alansari, Reem A
author_facet Alansari, Reem A
author_sort Alansari, Reem A
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To explore youth perception of the esthetics of different orthodontic appliances measured using different concepts of esthetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was answered by 194 youth participants (35.5% were 9–11 years old; 32.5% were 12–14 years old; and 32% were 15–17 years old). Participants evaluated and compared the attractiveness of images of different orthodontic appliances using a Likert scale. They indicated the acceptability of the appliances with a yes/no answer. They then chose which appliance to rank as their most preferred. RESULTS: The highest median attractiveness rating was for clear aligners (Mdn= 8, IQR= 4.25), followed by lingual and standard ceramic brackets (Mdn= 7, IQR= 6). The lowest median attractiveness rating was for hybrid brackets (Mdn= 4, IQR= 4). Clear aligners were significantly more attractive than all other orthodontic appliances (P<0.0001). Clear aligners also had the highest percentage of acceptability (80%), while hybrid brackets scored the lowest (42%). Ceramic and metal brackets fell in the middle range of attractiveness and acceptability but were chosen by male middle schoolers as their preferred appliances. Clear aligners were ranked the highest by this cohort. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the widespread preference and acceptability of clear aligners among the youth. Other orthodontic appliances were acceptable but to a lesser extent than clear aligners. This study informs orthodontists about their youth consumers’ behavior and may help inform treatment discussions in the orthodontic clinic.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7308181
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73081812020-06-29 Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances Alansari, Reem A Patient Prefer Adherence Original Research PURPOSE: To explore youth perception of the esthetics of different orthodontic appliances measured using different concepts of esthetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was answered by 194 youth participants (35.5% were 9–11 years old; 32.5% were 12–14 years old; and 32% were 15–17 years old). Participants evaluated and compared the attractiveness of images of different orthodontic appliances using a Likert scale. They indicated the acceptability of the appliances with a yes/no answer. They then chose which appliance to rank as their most preferred. RESULTS: The highest median attractiveness rating was for clear aligners (Mdn= 8, IQR= 4.25), followed by lingual and standard ceramic brackets (Mdn= 7, IQR= 6). The lowest median attractiveness rating was for hybrid brackets (Mdn= 4, IQR= 4). Clear aligners were significantly more attractive than all other orthodontic appliances (P<0.0001). Clear aligners also had the highest percentage of acceptability (80%), while hybrid brackets scored the lowest (42%). Ceramic and metal brackets fell in the middle range of attractiveness and acceptability but were chosen by male middle schoolers as their preferred appliances. Clear aligners were ranked the highest by this cohort. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the widespread preference and acceptability of clear aligners among the youth. Other orthodontic appliances were acceptable but to a lesser extent than clear aligners. This study informs orthodontists about their youth consumers’ behavior and may help inform treatment discussions in the orthodontic clinic. Dove 2020-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7308181/ /pubmed/32606617 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S257814 Text en © 2020 Alansari. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Alansari, Reem A
Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title_full Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title_fullStr Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title_full_unstemmed Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title_short Youth Perception of Different Orthodontic Appliances
title_sort youth perception of different orthodontic appliances
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7308181/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606617
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S257814
work_keys_str_mv AT alansarireema youthperceptionofdifferentorthodonticappliances