Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of dental rotational movements using clear aligners with different attachment configurations.
Materials And Methods: This retrospective study analysed 212 teeth from 89 patients undergoing Invisalign treatment. Digital models were analysed after the virtual treatment plan (ST1) and after the first treatment phase (ET1) to evaluate the effective clinical rotational movement. The rotational movements of incisors, canines, and bicuspids were measured using data from the Clincheck Movements Table. ST1 and ET1 were compared to determine the actual rotational movement achieved (ST1-ET1). The presence or absence of attachments (rectangular or optimized) on teeth was analysed. The accuracy of rotational movements among attachment types was compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Multiple linear regressions were conducted with accuracy as the dependent variable and tooth type, gender, and age as predictors.
Results: Optimized attachments had the highest median accuracy (70%), followed by rectangular (65%), and without attachment (63%), with no significant differences (p = .5). There were no significant differences across age groups, genders, or tooth types. Baseline accuracy was 68.62% (95% CI: 56.03-81.20, p < .001). Age was a significant predictor (estimate = -0.30, 95% CI: -0.58 - -0.03, p = .032), indicating decreased accuracy with increasing age. The model's R was 0.046, with an adjusted R of 0.003, indicating minimal variance explained.
Conclusion: The addition of attachment configurations to clear aligners improves rotational accuracy, but not significantly. Further advancements in these configurations are needed to enhance the performance of the aligners.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12846 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!