Sains Malaysiana 40(11)(2011): 1313–1317

Orthodontic Material Usage Among Malaysian Orthodontists

(Kegunaan Bahan-bahan Ortodontik di Kalangan Pakar Ortodontik di Malaysia )

Asma Alhusna Abang Abdullah*

Department of Orthodontic, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz, 50300 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Nurul Asyikin Yahya

Department of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Jalan Raja Muda Abdul Aziz , 50300 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Received: 15 July 2010 / Accepted: 29 November 2010

ABSTRACT

Fixed orthodontic treatment requires the use of orthodontic brackets and archwires in order to correct malocclusions. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pattern of orthodontic material usages i.e. bracket and archwire among Malaysian orthodontists. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to members of the Malaysian Association of Orthodontist. Data entry and statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 15.0. Descriptive statistics were used for analysis. Means and standard deviations were calculated for continuous variables, frequency and percentages for categorical variables. Thirty-four orthodontists responded to the survey, with 76% (n=26) were female and the mean age was 43.31 years (SD 8.76). Most respondents used conventional metal brackets (60%, n=60) and most bracket prescription used was MBT (56%, n=19). At levelling stage, most respondents used nickel titanium archwire (84.5%, n=47). Stainless steel archwire was the most favourable choice for retraction/space closure stage (73.9%, n=34). At finishing, most respondents (60.4%, n=29) preferred to use stainless steel wire in their cases. As a conclusion, specific types of orthodontic materials were preferred and used by Malaysian orthodontists in delivering orthodontic treatment.

Keywords: Archwire; bracket; orthodontic; survey

ABSTRAK

Rawatan ortodontik tetap memerlukan penggunaan braket ortodontik dan wayar arkus untuk merawat maloklusi. Objektif kajian ini dijalankan adalah untuk menilai corak penggunaan bahan ortodontik iaitu braket dan wayar arkus di kalangan pakar ortodontik di Malaysia. Borang kaji selidik telah diedarkan kepada ahli Persatuan Pakar Ortodontik Malaysia. Maklumat kajian telah dimasukkan dan dianalisis menggunakan SPSS versi 15.0. Statistik deskriptif telah digunakan sebagai analisis. Purata dan sisihan piawai dikira untuk pembolehubah berterusan, frekuensi dan peratusan untuk pembolehubah mutlak. Tiga puluh empat pakar ortodontik membalas kaji selidik ini dengan 76% (n=26) adalah perempuan dengan purata umur 43.31(SD 8.76). Kebanyakan responden menggunakan braket logam konvesional (60%, n=60) dan preskripsi braket yang paling banyak digunakan adalah MBT (56%, n=19). Pada peringkat penyusunan gigi, kebanyakan responden menggunakan wayar arkus nikel titanium (84.5%, n=47). Wayar arkus keluli tahan karat merupakan wayar yang menjadi pilihan untuk peringkat penarikkan/penutupan ruang. (73.9%, n=34). Semasa peringkat kemasan kebanyakan responden (60.4%, n=29) gemar menggunakan wayar arkus keluli tahan karat untuk kes mereka. Sebagai kesimpulan, terdapat bahan ortodontik yang spesifik yang diutamakan dan digunakan oleh pakar ortodontik di Malaysia dalam memberikan rawatan ortodontik.

Kata kunci: Braket; ortodontik; tinjauan; wayar arkus

REFERENCES

American Statistical Association. 2000. What is a survey? (online) http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/whatsurvey.html (20 May 2009).

Angolkar, P.V, Kapila, S., Duncanson, M.G. & Nanda, R.S. 1990. Evaluation of friction between brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 98: 499-506.

Bishara S.E & Trulove T.S. 1990. Comparisons of different debonding techniques for ceramic brackets: an in vitro study. Part II. Findings and clinical implications. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 98: 263-273.

Harzer, W., Bourauel, C. & Gmyrek, H. 2004 Torque capacity of metal and polycarbonate brackets with and without a metal slot. European Journal of Orthodontics 26: 435-441.

Kusy, R.P. 1997. A Review of contemporary archwires: their properties and characteristics. Angle Orthodontist 67(3): 197-208.

Matasa, C.G. 1994. Preadjusted appliances: one shoe fits all (2). Phoenix Without Ashes 7: 1-4.

Nikolai, R.J. 1997. Orthodontic wire. A continuing evolution. Seminars in Orthodontics 3: 157-165.

Odegaard, J. 1989. Debonding ceramic brackets. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 23: 632-635.

Oral Health Division, Ministry of Health Malaysia. 2008. Oral Healthcare in Malaysia. MOH/K/GIG/7(BK): 16-17.

Pandis N., Eliades T., Partowi S. & Bourauel C. 2008. Forces exerted by conventional and self-ligating brackets during simulated first- and second-order corrections. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 133 (5): 738-742.

Pellegrini, P., Sauerwein, R., Finlayson, T., McLeod, J., Covell, D.A., Maier, T. & Machida, C.A. 2009. Plaque retention by self ligating vs. elastomeric orthodontic brackets: Quantitative comparison of oral bacteria and detection with adenosine triphosphate-driven bioluminescence. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 135(4): 426.e1-9.

Reicheneder, C.A., Baumert, U., Gedrange, T., Proff, P., Faltermeier, A. & Muessig, D. 2007. Frictional properties of aesthetic brackets. European Journal of Orthodontics 29(4): 359-365.

Thomas, S., Birnie, D.J. & Sherriff, M. 1998. A comparative in vitro study of the frictional characteristics of two types of self ligating brackets and two types of pre adjusted edgewise brackets tied with elastomeric ligatures. European Journal of Orthodontics 20: 589-596.

Turnbull, N.R. & Birnie, D.J. 2007. Treatment efficiency of conventional vs self-ligating brackets: Effects of archwire size and material. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 131: 395-399.

*Corresponding author; email: asmaabdullah@yahoo.com