RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This prospective clinical study aimed to evaluate the immediate impact of Twin-block appliance insertion on the sleep of adolescents using a wearable device. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 24 girls, aged 11-13 years, with Class II division 1 molar relationship, skeletal class 2 malocclusion (ANB ≥5) and overjet measuring ≥5 mm were selected. Exclusion criteria included a history of previous orthodontic treatment, systemic disease, irregular sleep pattern, obstructive sleep apnea, medical history of breathing disorders, or concurrent use of medications. Participants wore a wearable device to measure sleep parameters, including deep sleep, light sleep, minutes awake during sleep, wake-up times, bedtimes and total sleep times. The participants wore the device for 10 days prior to Twin-block insertion and sleep data were collected for another 10 days after insertion. RESULTS: Following the insertion of the Twin-block appliance, there was a highly statistically significant shift in bedtime and wake-up time to later hours (P < .001). All participants experienced a highly significant delay in bedtime compared to the recommended 10 pm time (P < .001). Additionally, there was a significant increase in the duration of light sleep (P < .05). However, the effect on deep sleep, minutes awake during sleep and sleep duration was not statistically significant. None of the sleep parameters tested showed statistically significant changes between the first 5 days after Twin-block insertion with the subsequent 5 days. CONCLUSION: The immediate insertion of the Twin-block appliance disrupts sleep onset, wake-up time and light sleep during the specified period of 10 days.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the outcome quality of manual and digital orthodontic diagnostic setups in non-extraction cases according to the American Board of Orthodontics model grading system and to calculate the laboratory time needed for orthodontic diagnostic setup construction. METHODS: The sample consisted of 60 pretreatment models of non-extraction orthodontic cases with age ranges of 18-30. The study models were duplicated and scanned with 3Shape R-750 scanner. Digital and manual diagnostic setups were constructed according to their respective treatment plans. Digital diagnostic setups were 3D printed and then both manual and digital setups were assessed using the modified American Board of Orthodontics Cast Radiograph evaluation score (ABO CRE), which includes alignment, marginal ridge, buccolingual inclination, occlusal contacts, occlusal relationships, interproximal contacts, and overjet. The laboratory time needed for orthodontic setups was measured in minutes. RESULTS: The total ABO CRE score of the digital diagnostic setup group (5.93 ± 2.74) was significantly lower than that of the manual diagnostic setup group (13.08 ± 3.25). The manual diagnostic setup had significantly larger scores in marginal ridge, overjet, overbite, buccolingual inclination, occlusal relationship, and total scores (P < 0.01). However, the digital diagnostic setup had a statistically larger occlusal contacts score than the manual diagnostic setup (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the alignment and the interproximal contacts scores in either group. The manual diagnostic setup needed significantly longer laboratory time (187.8 ± 14.22) than the digital setup (93.08 ± 12.65) (P < 0.01). Comparison between broken teeth was performed by using the chi-square test which found no significant difference between different tooth types. CONCLUSIONS: Digital diagnostic setup is a reliable tool for orthodontic diagnostic setup construction providing excellent quality setup models. Manual diagnostic setup is time consuming with a technique-sensitive laboratory procedure.
