Effects of orthodontic treatment with aligners and fixed appliances on speech

New generation of orthodontic devices and materials with bioactive capacities to improve enamel demineralization

OBJECTIVE

The article reviewed novel orthodontic devices and materials with bioactive capacities in recent years and elaborated on their properties, aiming to provide guidance and reference for future scientific research and clinical applications.

DATA, SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Researches on remineralization, protein repellent, antimicrobial activity and multifunctional novel bioactive orthodontic devices and materials were included. The search of articles was carried out in Web of Science, PubMed, Medline and Scopus.

CONCLUSIONS

The new generation of orthodontic devices and materials with bioactive capacities has broad application prospects. However, most of the current studies are limited to in vitro studies and cannot explore the true effects of various bioactive devices and materials applied in oral environments. More research, especially in vivo researches, is needed to assist in clinical application.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Enamel demineralization (ED) is a common complication in orthodontic treatments. Prolonged ED can lead to dental caries, impacting both the aesthetics and health of teeth. It is of great significance to develop antibacterial orthodontic devices and materials that can inhibit bacterial accumulation and prevent ED. However, materials with only preventive effect may fall short of addressing actual needs. Hence, the development of novel bioactive orthodontic materials with remineralizing abilities is imperative. The article reviewed the recent advancements in bioactive orthodontic devices and materials, offering guidance and serving as a reference for future scientific research and clinical applications.

Orthodontic Risk Perspectives among Orthodontists during Treatment: A Descriptive Pilot Study in Greece and Slovakia

This study explores orthodontists' perspectives on risks associated with orthodontic treatment, as described by Greek and Slovak orthodontists. Informed by the foundational importance of effective communication of risk perspectives in health sciences, particularly in facilitating valid consent and shared decision-making, this research addresses gaps identified in the literature concerning the consistent communication of potential treatment risks based on demographic and cultural characteristics. This study identifies 15 potential critical risks during orthodontic treatment. These risks include root resorption; temporary undesired changes to the occlusion; sleep difficulties; not achieving an ideal result; development of black triangles between teeth; taking additional X-rays; speech difficulties; using a protective splint during sports; duration of treatment; number of visits; transmission of infectious diseases; and swallowing orthodontic appliances. A questionnaire, distributed electronically to orthodontists in Greece (N1 = 570) and Slovakia (N2 = 210) from September 2022 to December 2022, aimed to assess risk communication practices, taking into consideration socio-demographic factors, such as country, gender, age, and academic-degree-related variations. A total of 168 valid questionnaires (91 from Slovakia and 77 from Greece) were obtained, indicating significant disparities in the risks emphasized and preferred forms of consent. The Greek orthodontists focused more on the risks involved, such as relapse, root resorption, temporal occlusal changes, and failure of desired movement, while the Slovak practitioners tended to be more interested in sleeping difficulties, temporal occlusal changes, and not achieving an ideal result. They also obtained written or digital consent from patients or their parents/guardians more frequently than the Greek team. Male orthodontists discussed specific risks more frequently, including relapse and extractions, whereas females preferred written or digital consent. PhD-trained orthodontists prioritized certain risks, indicating the need for tailored approaches. This study underscores the dynamic nature of risk assessment in orthodontic practice, emphasizing its ethical and strategic dimensions. The findings advocate for tailored risk communication strategies that recognize individual, contextual, and cultural factors, and the need for an orthodontic informed consent protocol for a tailored communication approach for patients to elevate the standard of care in European orthodontics. The reliance on digital tools reflects contemporary trends in enhancing patient understanding, thereby supporting ongoing innovation in orthodontic practices.

Clear aligner therapy versus conventional brackets: Oral impacts over time

Background

The objective is to compare the impact of clear aligner treatment (CAT) versus conventional fixed appliance treatment (FAT) on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) among adults at five-time points: pretreatment (T0), 1 week (T1), 1 month after (T2), and 6 months after (T3) treatment initiation, and in the long-term follow-up (T4).

Materials and Methods

Search terms were based on Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and non-MeSH. Potentially eligible studies compared OHRQoL in clear aligner (CA) and fixed appliance (FA) patients. In February 2023, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and PubMed were searched for published studies. Nine out of 94 shortlisted papers were eligible for a systematic review. Of these nine papers, five studies were considered for a meta-analysis.

Results

At T0, CA and FA patients had similar oral health impact profile (OHIP)-14 questionnaire scores with a standard mean difference (SMD) of 0.105 (confidence interval [CI]: -1.029-1.48). The SMD of the OHRQoL related to T1, T2, and T3 was -3.119 (CI: -0.145, 0.355), -1.527 (CI: -5.597, -0.64), and - 2.331 (CI: -1.906, -1.148). T4 showed no difference between groups (SMD = 0.007, CI: CI: -4.286, -0.376). Regarding the OHIP-14 domains, functional limitations remained consistent in both groups across all time intervals. Psychological discomfort exhibited a notable difference only at T2. Throughout the treatment, CAT showed significantly lower levels of physical, psychological, and social disability, as well as handicap, though these differences did not persist beyond T4. Notably, physical pain was the sole domain that remained elevated in the FAT group up to T4.

Conclusion

During the 1st day of the orthodontic treatment, both the CA and FA groups had comparable OHRQoL statuses. However, as time passed, the CA group notably improved their OHRQoL compared to the FA group. Interestingly, after a year or the completion of treatment, both groups eventually reached similar OHRQoL levels. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that FA patients continued to experience more physical pain even a year later.

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the "Protocolo de Avaliação Miofuncional Orofacial MBGR" from Brazilian Portuguese into English

In health-related research, an increasing number of clinical assessment tools are translated and cross-culturally adapted for cross-national and cross-cultural studies and comparisons. However, when translating and cross-culturally adapting clinical assessment tools for use across new countries, cultures, or languages, we must follow a thorough method to reach semantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalences between translated and original versions. Therefore, in this study, we translated and cross-culturally adapted the Protocolo MBGR (Marchesan, Berretin-Felix, Genaro, and Rehder) from Brazilian Portuguese into English, following international guidelines, and named it "MBGR Protocol." To verify its content validity, we used the Content Validity Index. Results indicated excellent content validity: a Scale-Content Validity Index of 0.96 and 97% of all translation units with an Item-Content Validity Index of 1.00. Also, to prove its face validity and confirm whether it worked in the target population's linguistic-cultural setting, we used it with 35 subjects. Again, results demonstrated excellent face validity: in the pretest, 91% of all translation units were considered comprehensible and clear; in the pilot test, 98% of all translation units were considered comprehensible and clear. Thus, we concluded that the MBGR Protocol is promising to enhance the uptake of studies in Orofacial Myology worldwide and support researchers and health professionals in assessing and diagnosing orofacial myofunctional disorders in children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly. Also, it may support evidence-based practice and assist in standardizing assessment and diagnostic criteria. The MBGR Protocol should have its psychometric properties tested before being used in clinical practice or scientific research. Therefore, future studies are needed, and collaborations among researchers from South and North American countries are encouraged to create an international network and advance with knowledge and skills in the Orofacial Myology discipline.

Effect of clear aligner attachment design on extrusion of maxillary lateral incisors: A multicenter, single-blind randomized clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Extrusion of maxillary lateral incisors during aligner treatment is a difficult movement to achieve accurately. Despite recommendations regarding attachment design, few studies and no prospective trials compare predictability among attachments. This study aimed to compare the efficacy between optimized and horizontal attachment designs for achieving maxillary lateral incisor extrusion during clear aligner treatment.

METHODS

The study included maxillary lateral incisors in 3 orthodontic practices requiring at least 0.3 mm of extrusion during the first series of 20-25 aligners in patients aged ≥16 years who were scheduled to begin clear aligner treatment (Invisalign; Align Technology, San Jose, Calif). Teeth were randomly assigned to receive optimized (O), rectangular horizontal nonbeveled (H), rectangular horizontal incisally-beveled (HIB), or rectangular horizontal gingivally-beveled (HGB) attachments. After the first series, a blinded evaluator measured extrusion using superimpositions with initial and predicted models. Linear models determined the difference in the predicted extrusion percentage achieved on the basis of attachment design. Other covariates were patient age, sex, number of trays, and self-reported compliance.

RESULTS

Forty patients (74 teeth) were enrolled, and 38 patients (71 teeth) completed the study. Intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability for extrusion measurements was high (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.985 and 0.991, respectively). The achieved extrusion was significantly less than predicted (mean, 73%; P <0.0001). The average achieved extrusion was 62%, 79%, 78%, and 78% for O, H, HIB, and HGB attachments, respectively, with H significantly more effective than O (P = 0.0403). Horizontal attachments (H, HIB, and HGB combined) were significantly more effective than O attachments (P = 0.0060), with an average difference in achieved extrusion of 14% of the predicted amount (95% confidence interval, 4-23; estimated 76% vs 62%). Horizontal attachments were an estimated 22% more effective than O attachments for extruding maxillary lateral incisors.

CONCLUSIONS

Horizontal attachments are more effective than O attachments for predicted maxillary lateral incisor extrusion between 0.3 and 2.5 mm. The 3 horizontal attachment designs evaluated performed similarly for achieving predicted extrusion.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This randomized clinical trial was registered and reported at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04968353).

PROTOCOL

The protocol was not published before trial commencement.

FUNDING

This study was funded in part by the Alexander Fellowship of the Virginia Commonwealth University School of Dentistry, the Southern Association of Orthodontists, and the Virginia Orthodontic Education and Research Foundation. No funding source influenced the study design, the collection, analysis or interpretation of data, writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publication.

Proficiency of Clear Aligner Therapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and efficiency of orthodontic treatment using clear aligner therapy (CAT). This efficiency was measured using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index, the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) index, or the similarity between the final ClinCheck and the final scanned models. A search was done electronically between 1998 and 2021 using the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. Three reviewers individually rated the articles. The ROBINS tool and the Cochrane risk of bias tool were used to evaluate the quality of observational research and randomized controlled trials, respectively. The degree of certainty for each selected outcome was evaluated using the grading of recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) approach. Six studies with a total of 166 participants were considered after the full texts of 61 potential reports were reviewed. This research included in the review covered the period from 1998 to 2021 in retrospect. According to the current systematic review and meta-analysis, transparent aligners had a successful outcome. In mild to moderate cases, aligner treatment appears to have a significant advantage in terms of efficiency (treatment time); nonetheless, insufficient evidence of efficacy was observed based on multiple cross-sectional investigations. When compared to traditional brackets, clear aligners provided a more stable course of treatment.

The combined orthodontic and restorative treatment for patients with malocclusion and dentition defects: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To explore the effects of a combined orthodontic and restorative approach on chewing, swallowing, and language function in patients with malocclusion and dental defects.

METHODS

A total of 112 patients with malocclusion and dentition defects admitted to the Lianyungang Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine from June 2019 to June 2022 were prospectively selected. The patients were divided into study and control groups using a simple random number table method, with 56 patients in each group. The control group received routine restoration, whereas the study group received a combination of orthodontic and restorative treatments. The chewing function, swallowing and language function, and gingival periodontal condition before and after treatment in both groups were compared using t-test or Wilcoxon test, while treatment satisfaction were compared using chi-square test or Fisher exact test.

RESULTS

After treatment, maximum area frame bite force/max movie force in both groups increased compared to before treatment, while occlusion time, bite force distrbution balance, and standard deviation hue decreased compared to before treatment. Moreover, maximum area frame bite force/max movie force in the study group was higher than that in the control group, whereas occlusion time, bite force distrbution balance, and standard deviation hue were lower than those in the control group (P < .05). The swallowing and language function scores of the study group were higher than those of the control group (P < .05). After treatment, the bleeding index, plaque index, and probing depth of both groups decreased compared to before treatment, and the study group was lower than the control group (P < .05). The treatment satisfaction of the study group (94.64%) was higher than that of the control group (82.14%) (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Adopting a combined orthodontic and restorative approach to intervene in patients with malocclusion and dentition defects is beneficial for improving their periodontal condition, effectively restoring chewing, swallowing, and language functions, and achieving high patient satisfaction.

The effect of clear aligners on speech: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of clear aligners on the speech of patients undergoing orthodontic therapy through a systematic review of the literature. Search methods and selection criteria: The protocol of this systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42021278694. An electronic search of the Scopus, Embase, Pubmed, and Web of Science databases was done for papers published between January 2000 till September 2021. Studies that evaluated speech difficulties in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with clear aligners using objective and subjective analyses were included. The evaluated primary outcome was speech difficulties. Secondary outcomes were time to adaptation and recovery from speech difficulties. Study quality was assessed based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Handbook guidelines and ROBINS-I tool.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighty-three articles were screened to identify seven studies (n = 332 patients) that assessed speech difficulty with aligners, of which two were randomized trials. Meta-analysis was not performed due to the heterogeneity in the study designs. Five studies compared speech difficulty with aligners to fixed appliances. Two studies showed a moderate risk of bias and five studies had a serious risk of bias. Level of evidence was downgraded to low due to the methodological insufficiencies and risk of bias in the studies. All seven studies reported that aligners could influence the clarity and delivery of speech, similar to fixed appliances. Various phonemes were affected including /s/,/z/,/zh/,/sh/,/th/,/ch/ on wearing aligners. Errors in articulation of consonants and sibilants were noted with lisping and speech impairment. These speech difficulties were temporary and most patients recovered in 7-14 days while few patients took 30-60 days to recover.

CONCLUSION

The likelihood of speech difficulties appears high with clear aligners. However, patients adapt quickly and speech returns to normal. The results of this review must be interpreted with caution and more well-designed randomized trials examining long-term effects of aligners on speech are indicated.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

Orthodontists should counsel patients opting for clear aligner treatment of the potential transient speech difficulties.

REGISTRATION

The protocol for this systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42021278694.

The Effect of Treatment With Clear Aligners Versus Fixed Appliances on Oral Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients With Severe Crowding: A One-Year Follow-Up Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Objective

To compare the level of oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) between patients receiving clear aligners or fixed appliances within one year of follow-up using Oral Health Impact Profile 14 (OHIP-14), a validated self-administered questionnaire.

Materials and methods

A single-centered, two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted on 36 adult patients (19 females, 17 males; age range: 18 to 25 years) who had severe crowding and require orthodontic treatment with first premolars extraction. The patients were equally and randomly divided into two groups: The clear aligners (CA) group and the fixed appliances (FA) group. OHRQoL was assessed using the OHIP-14 tool at various times during comprehensive orthodontic therapy: baseline (T0), one week (T1), two weeks (T2), one month (T3), 6 months (T4), and 12 months (T5) after starting the active orthodontic treatment. Mann-Whitney U test or Friedman test were used to detect significant differences. The level of significance was set at 5%. 

Results

All of the selected patients entered the statistical analysis stage. There were no significant differences between the CA and FA groups for the psychological discomfort, psychological disability, social disability, and handicap (P˃0.05) at almost all assessment times. For the functional limitation, physical pain, physical disability, and the overall score, there were significant differences between the studied groups (P˂0.05), with the FA group having higher mean scores than the CA group in all of the assessment times.

Conclusion

Patients' treatment with clear aligners has less impact on OHRQoL than those treated using conventional fixed appliances during the first year of treatment.

Screening of fluoride analysis as a biochemical parameter in the orthodontic treatment using fixed appliances

Saliva is a critical and useful biological fluid necessary for good health and for the appropriate execution of mouth activities. Orthodontic biomaterials have a complex relationship with many components, including the oral environment. Treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances may causes dental caries. As a result, it is necessary to comprehend how orthodontic therapy and various fluoride regimens affect the chances of developing dental cavities as well as individual risk factors. Usage of fluoride will tend to reduce the caries in the patients diagnosed with the fixed orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study was to screen the biochemical parameter of the fluoride levels in the patients undergone and completed the treatment of orthodontic fixed appliances. In this study, 35 patients have been visited on day 1 as well as day 35 and categorized as T₀ and T₁ groups. Saliva samples were collected and fluoride levels were measured between T₀ and T₁ groups. Using the fluoride kit with the spectrophotometer, fluoride levels were measured. The results confirmed similar fluoride levels between T₀ (26.11 ± 4.86) and T₁ (27.71 ± 4.40) groups. There was no significant association observed in this study (p = 0.56). Fluoride might have no role in the patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.

Clear Aligners in Patients with Amelogenesis and Dentinogenesis Imperfecta

Dentinogenesis imperfecta (DI) and amelogenesis imperfecta (AI) are hereditary abnormalities of dental hard tissues. Dental abnormalities may also be accompanied by symptoms of disorders such as osteogenesis imperfecta. AI and DI have a significant burden on socializing, function, and comfort; therefore, frequent screening and accurate diagnosis is the cornerstone of managing such conditions. Both AI and DI could be treated with many strategies, including restorative, prosthetic, periodontal, surgical, and orthodontics treatment. The interdisciplinary combination of orthodontic, prosthodontic, and periodontic treatment has been proven to improve the prognosis of AI and DI. Regarding orthodontic treatment, the most difficult element of orthodontic therapy may be maintaining a high level of motivation for what might be a prolonged form of treatment spanning several years. There are many forms of orthodontic management for AI and DI, including removable appliances, functional appliances, and fixed appliances. Clear aligner therapy (CAT) contains a broad range of equipment that works in different ways, has different construction processes, and is compatible with different malocclusion procedures. The application of CAT in patients with AI and DI is favorable over the fixed applicants. However, the available evidence regarding the application of CAT in AI is weak and heterogeneous. In this review, we discussed the current evidence regarding the application of clear CAT in patients with AI and DI.