Relapse and failure rates between CAD/CAM and conventional fixed retainers: a 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Retention has been always considered a major challenge in orthodontics. Recently computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) fixed retainers (FRs) have been introduced as a marked development in retainer technology, offering potential advantages. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the differences in relapse and failure rates in patients treated with FRs using CAD/CAM technology, lab-based technique, and chairside method. TRIAL DESIGN: A double-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over a 2-year period at a single centre. INTERVENTIONS: These patients were divided into three groups: CAD/CAM group with multistranded Stainless Steel wires (CAD/CAM, n = 14), lab group with the same multistranded wires (lab, n = 15), and a chairside group with Stainless Steel Ortho-FlexTech wires (chairside, n = 14). OUTCOMES: Inter-canine width (ICW) and Little's irregularity index were digitally measured from scans at the orthodontic debonding (T1), 6-month retention (T2), 1-year retention (T3), and 2-year retention (T4) visits. All forms of failure were documented and analyzed. RANDOMIZATION: Participants were randomly assigned to the three groups using online randomization software (randomization.com) by a statistician who was not involved in the study. BLINDING: Patients were blinded in terms of the FR group to which they were each randomly assigned. The principal investigator was blinded upon data analysis since patients' records were coded to minimize observer and measurement bias. RESULTS: Initially 81 patients were assessed for eligibility. Seventy-five patients were randomly allocated into the three study groups. After 2-year follow-up, 43 patients came back for the follow-up and were analyzed. The CAD/CAM group showed significantly less reduction in ICW compared to the chairside group at all time intervals (P < .05) and compared to the lab group at 6 months (P = .038). In terms of LII, the CAD/CAM group exhibited significantly less change than the chairside and lab groups at all time intervals (P < .05). The CAD/CAM group had the lowest failure rate (21.4%), followed by chairside group (28.6%) and then lab group (33.3%), however the differences were insignificant. No harms were observed in the current study. CONCLUSION: Within 2 years of fixed retention, CAD/CAM FRs showed significantly less relapse than lab-based and chairside FRs. However, there was no significant difference in failure rates among the groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05915273.

Translation and preliminary validation of an ageism scale for dental students in Brazil (ASDS-Braz).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Ageism is a major barrier for age-appropriate care. The aim of this study was to translate and perform a preliminary validation of an ageism scale for dental students (ASDS) in Brazil (ASDS-Braz). METHODS: The 27-item original ageism scale was translated from English into Brazilian Portuguese. A panel of five Brazilian dental educators revised the scale to establish content validity. The translated version was completed by 156 dental students in the Federal University of Pelotas in Brazil. Principal component analysis, internal consistency reliability and discriminant validity were estimated. RESULTS: All items in the Brazilian Portuguese version received a content validity index score ≥0.80 indicating that they were relevant to the topic. The principal component analysis produced a 12-item scale with three components that accounted for 51% of the overall variance. The first component contained six items associated with a negative view of older adults; the second component contained three items dealing with the complexity of providing care for older adults; and the third component contained three items associated with a positive view of older people. Discriminant validity did not show any differences related to demographic factors, the semester of studies and history of living with older people. CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary validation of the ASDS-Braz produced a 12-item scale with three components with acceptable validity and reliability. Future research in a larger, multi-institutional sample is now warranted.

Dual institution validation of an ageism scale for dental students.

PURPOSE/AIM: Ageism negatively affects health care. This paper presents an extended validation of a novel scale assessing ageism among dental students. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A previously pilot-tested 27-question scale applied to a larger sample (n = 315) from two U.S. dental schools with Principal Component Analysis used to assess internal structure of the measure. Questions whose deletion increased the overall α loading on >1 factor or those unexpectedly grouped in another factor were thoroughly examined. RESULTS: The scale resulted in five statements (grouped in two factors), which explained 63% of the overall variance with a substantially higher reliability value than other solutions (0.76). Two factors highly correlated were grouped together in a single scale. The five statements are "Elderly people do not take good care of their teeth" (0.62), "Elderly patients do not usually comply with dental advice" (0.93), "The Elderly patient does not live long enough to make it worthwhile to invest time and effort in complex dental treatment" (0.81), "The elderly patient does not live long enough to make it worthwhile to invest money in expensive dental treatment" (0.95), and "Dental treatment of elderly patients is too time-consuming" (0.57). CONCLUSIONS: Five items achieved high reliability toward the validity of this scale.

Development and preliminary validation of an ageism scale for dental students.

PURPOSE/AIM: This work presents the preliminary validation of a novel scale assessing ageism attitudes among dental students. METHOD AND MATERIALS: A 27-question scale was created based on existing ageism scales. The new ageism scale was applied to 144 dental students. Content validity was achieved by experts' consensus. Questions whose deletion increased the overall α, loading < 0.40, loading on more than one factors, or those unexpectedly grouped in another factor were thoroughly examined. Principal Component Analysis assessed internal structure of the measure. RESULTS: The final ageism scale included four items in a single factor that explained 58.5% of the overall variance with substantially higher reliability than other factors. The Cronbach's α for this single four-items factor was 0.75. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary analysis of a novel ageism scale for dental professionals pointed to four items achieving high reliability, providing guidance for a future definitive validation study with a larger sample.