1. Repositório Institucional da UFMG
  2. Publicações Científicas e Culturais
  3. Artigo de Periódico
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/50703
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.creatorKarina Maria Salvatore de Freitaspt_BR
dc.creatorRenata Cristina Gobbi de Oliveirapt_BR
dc.creatorRicardo Cesar Gobbi de Oliveirapt_BR
dc.creatorAdenilson Silva Chagaspt_BR
dc.creatorFabricio Pinelli Valarellipt_BR
dc.creatorRodrigo Hermont Cançadopt_BR
dc.creatorLuiz Filiphe Gonçalves Canutopt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-07T16:23:28Z-
dc.date.available2023-03-07T16:23:28Z-
dc.date.issued2019-07-22-
dc.citation.volume90pt_BR
dc.citation.issue1pt_BR
dc.citation.spage63pt_BR
dc.citation.epage68pt_BR
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.2319/031319-197.1pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn00033219pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1843/50703-
dc.description.resumoObjective To compare the level of satisfaction in the use of wraparound Hawley and thermoplastic maxillary retainers. Materials and Methods The study sample included 70 orthodontic patients (24 males and 46 females), who were in the retention stage (mean age = 20.80 years). All patients wore the two types of maxillary retainer for 1 month each, along with a 3×3 fixed mandibular retainer. After the use of each retainer, the patients responded to a questionnaire evaluating the level of satisfaction with their use of the maxillary retainer. Intergroup comparison was performed by independent t tests. Chi-square test was used to evaluate preference for the type of retainer by gender. Results The thermoplastic retainer was better for swallowing and the wraparound Hawley appliance was better for hygiene and durability. The other factors evaluated (adaptation, speech, comfort, esthetics, satisfaction, and fitting) did not show significant differences between the retainers. There was also no significant difference in preference for the appliances. Conclusions Regarding the overall satisfaction and the preference, there was no difference between the wraparound Hawley and thermoplastic retainers. The wraparound Hawley appliance was better in hygiene and resistance than the thermoplastic retainer; and the thermoplastic appliance was better than the wraparound Hawley for swallowing fluids and saliva.pt_BR
dc.format.mimetypepdfpt_BR
dc.languageengpt_BR
dc.publisherUniversidade Federal de Minas Geraispt_BR
dc.publisher.countryBrasilpt_BR
dc.publisher.departmentFAO - DEPARTAMENTO DE ODONTOLOGIA RESTAURADORApt_BR
dc.publisher.departmentFAO - DEPARTAMENTO DE ODONTOPEDIATRIA E ORTODONTIApt_BR
dc.publisher.initialsUFMGpt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofAngle Orthodontistpt_BR
dc.rightsAcesso Abertopt_BR
dc.subjectOrthodonticspt_BR
dc.subjectOrthodontic retainerspt_BR
dc.subjectRetentionpt_BR
dc.subject.otherOrthodonticspt_BR
dc.subject.otherPost and core techniquept_BR
dc.subject.otherMandiblept_BR
dc.subject.otherMaxillapt_BR
dc.titleLevel of satisfaction in the use of the wraparound hawley and thermoplastic maxillary retainerspt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de Periódicopt_BR
dc.url.externahttps://meridian.allenpress.com/angle-orthodontist/article/90/1/63/423103/Level-of-Satisfaction-in-the-Use-of-the-Wraparoundpt_BR
Appears in Collections:Artigo de Periódico

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Level of satisfaction in the use of the wraparound hawley and thermoplastic maxillary retainers.pdf188.29 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.