Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Screw-retained Arch Bar vs Conventional Erich's Arch Bar in Maxillomandibular Fixation: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Elhadidi, Merna Hosny; Awad, Sally; Elsheikh, Heba Abo-Elfetouh; Tawfik, Mohamed Abdel-Monem.
Afiliação
  • Elhadidi MH; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Aldakhlia, Egypt.
  • Awad S; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Aldakhlia, Egypt.
  • Elsheikh HA; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Aldakhlia, Egypt, Phone: +20 1024461010, e-mail: heba_elsheikh@mans.edu.eg.
  • Tawfik MA; Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Aldakhlia, Egypt.
J Contemp Dent Pract ; 24(12): 928-935, 2023 Dec 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38317388
ABSTRACT

AIM:

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of a conventional Erich's arch bar vs a modified screw-retained arch bar in maxillomandibular fixation of mandibular fracture. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

This parallel-arm randomized control trial included patients from the outpatient clinic with single favorable mandibular fractures that are indicated for closed reduction. They were subjected to maxillomandibular fixation using conventional Erich's arch bars in the control group and modified screw-retained arch bars in the study group. The outcome measures included operating time, glove perforations, postoperative pain, oral hygiene, fixation stability, occlusion, and mucosal coverage.

RESULTS:

A total of 20 patients (12 males and 8 females) with a 11 allocation ratio were included. There was a significant statistical difference regarding operation time and number of glove perforations in favor of group B as p < 0.001, p = 0.007, respectively. There was a significant statistical difference regarding pain after 1 day (p < 0.001), 1 week (p < 0.001) in favor of group B, and at 4 weeks (p = 0.015), and 6 weeks (p = 0.002) in favor of group A. Regarding oral hygiene at 1 week (p = 0.021) and at 6 weeks (p < 0.001), there was a significant statistical difference in favor of group B. Regarding mucosal coverage at 6 weeks, there was a significant statistical difference in favor of group A (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION:

The modified screw-retained arch bar can be considered an alternative to conventional arch bar as it provided less application time and better operator safety. It also showed better patient satisfaction regarding pain and oral hygiene. CLINICAL

SIGNIFICANCE:

Maxillomandibular fixation with the conventional technique was modified to screw-retained arch bar which is less time-consuming and provides better patient and operator satisfaction. How to cite this article Elhadidi MH, Awad S, Elsheikh HAE, et al. Comparison of Clinical Efficacy of Screw-retained Arch Bar vs Conventional Erich's Arch Bar in Maxillomandibular Fixation A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Contemp Dent Pract 2023;24(12)928-935.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnicas de Fixação da Arcada Osseodentária / Fraturas Mandibulares Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Contemp Dent Pract Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Egito

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnicas de Fixação da Arcada Osseodentária / Fraturas Mandibulares Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Contemp Dent Pract Assunto da revista: ODONTOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Egito