https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/efetch.fcgi?db=pubmed&id=37729286&retmode=xml&tool=Litmetric&email=readroberts32@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09 377292862023092220230923
2177-67092842023Dental press journal of orthodonticsDental Press J OrthodShort-term assessment of pain and discomfort during rapid maxillary expansion with tooth-bone-borne and tooth-borne appliances: randomized clinical trial.e2322220e2322220e232222010.1590/2177-6709.28.4.e2322220.oarS2176-94512023000400302The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate and compare, during the first week of rapid maxillary expansion (RME), the impact caused by two types of appliances: Hyrax and Hybrid Hyrax.Forty-two patients who met the eligibility criteria (aged 11-14 years, with transverse maxillary deficiency, posterior crossbite, and presence of maxillary first premolars and first permanent molars) were selected and randomly divided into two groups: TBB GROUP (tooth-bone-borne expander), treated with Hybrid Hyrax (12 females and 9 males, mean age 13.3 ± 1.3 years), and TB GROUP (tooth-borne expander), treated with Hyrax (5 females and 16 males, mean age 13.3 ± 1.4 years). Pain and discomfort were assessed in two times: after the first day of activation (T1) and four days after, by means of the numerical rate scale and the instrument MFIQ (Mandibular Functional Impairment Questionnaire). Descriptive statistics and the Mann-Whitney test were used for comparison between groups and between sexes. A 5% significance level was adopted.Both appliances had a negative impact, generating pain and discomfort, and reducing functional capacity. However, the scores obtained were of low intensity and no significant differences were observed between the groups. Considering sexes, there were statistically significant differences, with the female sex presenting higher scores for pain and functional limitation.Despite causing impact in pain and increase in the functional limitation, these changes were of low intensity, with no statistical difference between the groups. Females were more sensitive to the impact caused by the RME.PasquaBruno de Paula MachadoBPM0000-0002-0890-6179University of São Paulo, School of Orthodontics (São Paulo/SP, Brazil).AndréCristiane BarrosCB0000-0001-7756-7986University of Mogi das Cruzes, Technology Research Center (Mogi das Cruzes/SP, Brazil).PaivaJoão Batista deJB0000-0002-3178-4843University of São Paulo, Department for Orthodontics (São Paulo/SP, Brazil).Rino NetoJoséJ0000-0002-9124-8698University of São Paulo, Department for Orthodontics (São Paulo/SP, Brazil).engRandomized Controlled TrialJournal Article20230915
BrazilDental Press J Orthod1015322402176-9451IMMaleAnimalsHumansFemaleChildAdolescentHyraxesPain MeasurementPalatal Expansion TechniqueMolarPainO objetivo deste ensaio clínico randomizado foi avaliar e comparar, durante a primeira semana de expansão rápida da maxila (ERM), o impacto causado por dois tipos de aparelhos: Hyrax e Hyrax Híbrido.Quarenta e dois pacientes que atendiam aos critérios de seleção (idade de 11 a 14 anos, com deficiência transversal da maxila, mordida cruzada posterior e presença de primeiros pré-molares e primeiros molares permanentes superiores) foram selecionados e divididos aleatoriamente em dois grupos: Grupo DOS (expansor dento-osseossuportado), tratado com Hyrax Híbrido (12 mulheres e 9 homens, idade média 13,3 ± 1,3 anos), e Grupo DS (expansor dentossuportado), tratado com Hyrax (5 mulheres e 16 homens, idade média de 13,3 ± 1,4 anos). A dor e o desconforto foram avaliados em dois momentos: após o primeiro dia de ativação (T1) e após quatro dias, por meio da escala de frequência numérica e do instrumento MFIQ (Questionário de Limitação Funcional Mandibular). A estatística descritiva e o teste de Mann-Whitney foram utilizados para comparação entre os grupos e entre os sexos. Adotou-se nível de significância de 5%.Ambos os aparelhos tiveram impacto negativo, gerando dor e desconforto e reduzindo a capacidade funcional. No entanto, os escores obtidos foram de baixa intensidade e não foram observadas diferenças significativas entre os grupos. Considerando os sexos, houve diferenças estatisticamente significativas, com o sexo feminino apresentando maiores escores para dor e limitação funcional.Apesar de causar impacto na dor e aumento na limitação funcional, essas alterações foram de baixa intensidade, sem diferença estatística entre os grupos. As mulheres foram mais sensíveis ao impacto causado pela ERM. The authors report no commercial, proprietary or financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.20229212023422202392264220239201842202392013452023915epublish37729286PMC1050804910.1590/2177-6709.28.4.e2322220.oarS2176-94512023000400302Haas AJ. Long-term posttreatment evaluation of rapid palatal expansion. Angle Orthod. 1980;50(3):189–217.6996533McNamara JA., Jr Maxillary transverse deficiency. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117(5):567–570.10799117Garib DG, Henriques JFC, Janson G, de Freitas MR, Coelho RA. Rapid maxillary expansion-tooth tissue-borne versus tooth-borne expanders a computed tomography evaluation of dentoskeletal effects. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(4):548–557.16097223Dindaroglu F, Dogan S. Root resorption in Orthodontics. Turkish J Orthod. 2016;29(4):103–108.PMC600760530112483Garib DG, Henriques JF, Janson G, Freitas MR, Fernandes AY. Periodontal effects of rapid maxillary expansion with tooth-tissue-borne and tooth-borne expanders a computed tomography evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;129(6):749–758.16769493Wilmes B, Nienkemper M, Drescher D. Application and effectiveness of a miniimplant-and tooth-borne rapid palatal expansion device the hybrid Hyrax. World J Orthod. 2010;11(4):323–330.21490997Gunyuz TM, Germec-Cakan D, Tozlu M. Periodontal, dentoalveolar, and skeletal effects of tooth-borne and tooth-bone-borne expansion appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;148(1):97–109.26124033Kayalar E, Schauseil M, Kuvat SV, Emekli U, Firatli S. Comparison of tooth-borne and hybrid devices in surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion a randomized clinical cone-beam computed tomography study. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2016;44(3):285–293.26782847Pasqua BPM, André CB, Paiva JB, Tarraf NE, Wilmes B, Rino-Neto J. Dentoskeletal changes due to rapid maxillary expansion in growing patients with tooth-borne and tooth-bone-borne expanders A randomized clinical trial. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2022;25(4):476–484.34951124Kayalar E, Firalti S, Darendeliler MA, Dalci K, Dalci O. Skeletal, dentoalveolar, and buccal bone changes using hybrid and tooth-borne expanders for RME and SARME in different growth stages. Aust Orthod J. 2022;38(2):355–367.Cheung GC, Dalci O, Mustac S, Papageorgiou SN, Hammond S, Darendeliler MA. The upper airway volume effects produced by Hyrax, Hybrid-Hyrax, and Keles keyless expanders a single-centre randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod. 2021;43(3):254–264.32377675Needleman HL, Hoang CD, Allred E, Hertzberg J. Berde C Reports of pain by children undergoing rapid palatal expansion. Pediatr Dent. 2000;22(3):221–226.10846733Halicioglu K, Kiki A, Yavuz I. Subjective symptoms of RME patients treated with three different screw activation protocols a randomized clinical trial. Aust Orthod J. 2012;28(2):225–231.23304972Gecgelen M, Aksoy A, Kirdemir P, Doguc DK, Cesur G, Koskan O. Evaluation of stress and pain during rapid maxillary expansion treatments. J Oral Rehabil. 2012;39(10):767–775.22783926Feldmann I, Bazargani F. Pain and discomfort during the first week of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) using two different RME appliances A randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(3):391–396.PMC838199528029266Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(7):798–804.16000093Oliveira BH, Nadanovsky P. Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Oral Health Impact Profile-short form. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2005;33(4):307–314.16008638Campos JA, Carrascosa AC, Maroco J. Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire. J Oral Rehabil. 2012;39(5):377–383.22251134Stegenga B, de Bont LG, de Leeuw R, Boering G. Assessment of mandibular function impairment associated with temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis and internal derangement. J Orofac Pain. 1993;7(2):183–195.8358365Kang S, Lee SJ, Ahn SJ, Heo MS, Kim TW. Bone thickness of the palate for orthodontic mini-implant anchorage in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007;131(4 Suppl):S74–S81.17448390Becker K, Unland J, Wilmes B, Tarraf NE, Drescher D. Is there an ideal insertion angle and position for orthodontic mini-implants in the anterior palate A CBCT study in humans. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019;156(3):345–354.31474264Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC. Essential medical statistics. Blackwell Science: Massachusetts, USA; 2006.Angelieri F, Cevidanes LH, Franchi L, Gonçalves JR, Benavides E, McNamara JA., Jr Midpalatal suture maturation classification method for individual assessment before rapid maxillary expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;144(5):759–769.PMC418529824182592Ngan P, Kess B, Wilson S. Perception of discomfort by patients undergoing orthodontic treatment Am J Orthod Dentofac. Orthop. 1989;96:47–53.2750720Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF, Caraceni A, Hanks GW, Loge JH. Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011;41(6):1073–1093.21621130Scheurer PA, Firestone AR, Burgin WB. Perception of pain as a result of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Eur J Orthod. 1996;18(4):349–357.8921656Luz CN, Pasqua BDPM, Paiva JB, Rino-Neto J. Cervical vertebrae maturation assessment as a predictive method for midpalatal suture maturation stages in 11-to 14-year-olds retrospective study. Clinical and Investigative Orthodontics. 2022;81(1):43–49.De Felippe NL, Da Silveira AC, Viana G, Smith B. Influence of palatal expanders on oral comfort, speech, and mastication. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137(1):48–53.20122430