Top

Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie

Published in:

01-03-2014 | Original article

Methods to evaluate compliance of patients with removable appliances—survey results

Authors: H. Meyer-Gutknecht, U. Fritz, PD Dr. T.C. Schott

Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie | Issue 2/2014

Abstract

Objectives

Are removable appliances still being routinely used in orthodontic offices? Which methods do clinicians use to assess compliance with wear requirements, and how effective are these methods considered to be?

Subjects and methods

A questionnaire inquiring about types of treatment, methods of assessing patient compliance with removable appliances, and the perceived effectiveness of these methods was mailed to a sample of 375 members of the German Orthodontic Society (“Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kieferorthopädie”, DGKFO).

Results

The rate of returned questionnaires was 29 %. Almost all respondents (99 %) indicated that they used removable appliances and reported having a “relatively high” proportion of patients currently undergoing such treatment. The most widely used methods of compliance assessment were questioning patients and parents (96 %) and examining clinical parameters associated with the dentition and the appliance’s fit (95–100 %). While these parameters were considered “highly effective”, questioning the patients and parents was regarded as “less effective” despite its frequent application.

Conclusion

Removable appliances continue to be a standard method of orthodontic treatment. While patient compliance with wear requirements is mainly assessed via indirect clinical methods, the effectiveness of these parameters remains unclear.

Ackerman MB, Thornton B (2011) Posttreatment compliance with removable maxillary retention in a teenage population: a short-term randomized clinical trial. Orthodontics (Chic) 12:22–27

Bartsch A, Witt E, Sahm G et al (1993) Correlates of objective patient compliance with removable appliance wear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 104:378–386PubMedCrossRef

Bimler HP, Bimler AB (1987) Monitoring of orthodontic treatment using individual reaction curves. Fortschr Kieferorthop 48:371–378PubMedCrossRef

Bos A, Hoogstraten J, Prahl-Andersen B (2005) Towards a comprehensive model for the study of compliance in orthodontics. Eur J Orthod 27:296–301PubMedCrossRef

Bos A, Kleverlaan CJ, Hoogstraten J et al (2007) Comparing subjective and objective measures of headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 132:801–805PubMedCrossRef

Brandao M, Pinho HS, Urias D (2006) Clinical and quantitative assessment of headgear compliance: a pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 129:239–244PubMedCrossRef

Cole WA (2002) Accuracy of patient reporting as an indication of headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 121:419–423PubMedCrossRef

Cureton SL, Regennitter FJ, Yancey JM (1993) Clinical versus quantitative assessment of headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 104:277–284PubMedCrossRef

Cureton SL, Regennitter FJ, Yancey JM (1993) The role of the headgear calendar in headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 104:387–394PubMedCrossRef

10.

Hawkins DI, Coney KA (1981) Uninformed response error in survey research. J Mark Res 18:370–374CrossRef

11.

Haynes RB (1979) Introduction. In: Haynes RB TDW, Sackett DL (eds) Compliance in health care, 1st edn. Johns Hopkins University Press

12.

Korbmacher H, Kahl-Nieke B, Schnabel S (2000) Early orthodontic treatment of Class-III malocclusion in Germany. J Orofac Orthop 61:168–174PubMedCrossRef

13.

Krey KF, Hirsch C (2012) Frequency of orthodontic treatment in German children and adolescents: influence of age, gender, and socio-economic status. Eur J Orthod 34:152–157PubMedCrossRef

14.

Mehra T, Nanda RS, Sinha PK (1998) Orthodontists’ assessment and management of patient compliance. Angle Orthod 68:115–122PubMed

15.

Meier B, Wiemer KB, Miethke RR (2003) Invisalign—patient profiling. Analysis of a prospective survey. J Orofac Orthop 64:352–358PubMedCrossRef

16.

Sahm G, Bartsch A, Witt E (1990) Micro-electronic monitoring of functional appliance wear. Eur J Orthod 12:297–301PubMedCrossRef

17.

Sahm G, Bartsch A, Witt E (1990) Reliability of patient reports on compliance. Eur J Orthod 12:438–446PubMedCrossRef

18.

Schott TC, Engelhard L, Gomez-Serrano D et al (2011) Comparison of estimated and actual changes in gap widths of expansion screws in plate appliances with 7- and 14-day activation. J Orofac Orthop 72:446–456PubMedCrossRef

19.

Schott TC, Göz G (2010) Applicative characteristics of new microelectronic sensors Smart Retainer® and TheraMon® for measuring wear time. J Orofac Orthop 71:339–347PubMedCrossRef

20.

Schott TC, Göz G (2011) Color fading of the blue compliance indicator encapsulated in removable clear Invisalign Teen® aligners. Angle Orthod 81:185–191PubMedCrossRef

21.

Schott TC, Göz G (2011) Wearing times of orthodontic devices as measured by the TheraMon® microsensor. J Orofac Orthop 72:103–110PubMedCrossRef

22.

Schott TC, Göz G (2010) Young patients’ attitudes toward removable appliance wear times, wear-time instructions and electronic wear-time measurements—results of a questionnaire study. J Orofac Orthop 71:108–116PubMedCrossRef

23.

Slakter MJ, Albino JE, Fox RN et al (1980) Reliability and stability of the orthodontic Patient Cooperation Scale. Am J Orthod 78:559–563PubMedCrossRef

24.

Tervonen MM, Pirttiniemi P, Lahti S (2011) Development of a measure for orthodontists to evaluate patient compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139:791–796PubMedCrossRef

25.

Williams A (2003) How to … write and analyse a questionnaire. J Orthod 30:245–252PubMedCrossRef

26.

Witt E, Bartsch A, Sahm G (1992) Recommended times for wearing removable appliances—the results of a survey. Fortschr Kieferorthop 53:124–130PubMedCrossRef

27.

Wriedt S, Schmidtmann I, Indin-Wolf A et al (2012) Extraktionen in der KFO-Praxis − eine Umfrage zu Häufigkeit, Lokalisation und Indikation. Wissenschaftliche Jahrestagung der DGKFO, Stuttgart

Title: Methods to evaluate compliance of patients with removable appliances—survey results
Authors: H. Meyer-Gutknecht
U. Fritz
PD Dr. T.C. Schott
Publication date: 01-03-2014
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie / Issue 2/2014
Print ISSN: 1434-5293
Electronic ISSN: 1615-6714
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-013-0202-8

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Methods to evaluate compliance of patients with removable appliances—survey results

Abstract

Objectives

Subjects and methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Subjects and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2014

Metric precision via soft-tissue landmarks in three-dimensional structured-light scans of human faces

Maxillary expansion therapy with plates featuring a transverse screw: implications of patient compliance with wear-time and screw activation requirements

Prevalence of dentine hypersensitivity and study of associated factors: a European population-based cross-sectional study

Treatment efficiency of mini-implant-borne distalization depending on age and second-molar eruption

Mitteilungsseiten

Three-dimensional investigation of facial surface asymmetries in skeletal malocclusion patients before and after orthodontic treatment combined with orthognathic surgery