Oral hygiene compliance in orthodontic patients: a randomized controlled study on the effects of a post-treatment communication

Mauro Cozzani, Giulia Ragazzini, Alessia Delucchi, Sabrina Mutinelli, Carlo Barreca, Daniel J Rinchuse, Roberto Servetto, Vincenzo Piras, Mauro Cozzani, Giulia Ragazzini, Alessia Delucchi, Sabrina Mutinelli, Carlo Barreca, Daniel J Rinchuse, Roberto Servetto, Vincenzo Piras

Abstract

Background: Several studies have recently demonstrated that a post-treatment communication to explain the importance of an oral hygiene can improve the orthodontic patients' compliance over a period of 66 days. The main goal of this study is to evaluate the effects of a structured follow-up communication after orthodontic appliance application on oral hygiene compliance after 30-40 days.

Methods: Eighty-four orthodontic participants enrolled from patients who were beginning fixed orthodontic treatment at the Orthodontic Department, Gaslini Hospital, Genova, between July and October 2014 were randomly assigned to one of three trial arms. Before the bonding, all patients underwent a session of oral hygiene aimed at obtaining an plaque index of "zero." At the following orthodontic appointment, the plaque index was calculated for each patient in order to assess oral hygiene compliance. The first group served as control and did not receive any post-procedure communication, the second group received a structured text message giving reassurance, and the third group received a structured telephone call. Participants were blinded to group assignment and were not made aware that the text message or the telephone call was part of the study. (The research protocol was approved by the Italian Comitato Etico Regionale della Liguria-sezione 3^ c/o IRCCS-Istituto G. Gaslini 845/2014, and it is not registered in the trial's register.) RESULTS: Thirty patients were randomly assigned to the control group, 28 participants to the text message group, and 26 to the telephone group. Participants who received a post-treatment communication reported higher level of oral hygiene compliance than participants in the control group. The plaque index was 0.3 (interquartile range (Iqr), 0.60) and 0.75 (Iqr, 1.30), respectively, with a significant difference (P = 0.0205).

Conclusions: A follow-up procedure after orthodontic treatment may be an effective tool to increase oral hygiene compliance also over a short period.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT 2010 patients’ flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Box plot of plaque index in the control group and the communication group

References

    1. Al-Jewair T, Suri S. Predictors of adolescent compliance with oral hygiene instructions during two-arch multibracket fixed orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 2011;81:525–531. doi: 10.2319/092010-547.1.
    1. Marini I, Bortolotti F, Incerti Parenti S, Gatto MR, Alessandri Bonetti G. Combined effects of repeated oral hygiene motivation and type of toothbrush on orthodontic patients. A blind randomized clinical trial. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:5. doi: 10.2319/112113-856.1.
    1. Fleming P. Timetable for oral prevention in childhood—a current opinion. Prog Orthod. 2015;16(1):1–5. doi: 10.1186/s40510-015-0098-5.
    1. Gao X, Lo ECM, Kot SCC, Chan KCW. Motivational interviewing in improving oral health: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Periodontol. 2014;85(3):426–437. doi: 10.1902/jop.2013.130205.
    1. Fjeldsoe BS, Marshall AL, Miller YD. Behavior change interventions delivered by mobile telephone short-message service. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(2):165–173. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2008.09.040.
    1. Almog DM, Devries JA, Borrelli JA, Kopycka-Kedzierawski DT. The reduction of broken appointment rates through an automated appointment confirmation system. J Dent Educ. 2003;67(9):1016–1022.
    1. Roth JP, et al. Effect of a computer-generated telephone reminder system on appointment attendance. In: Seminars in orthodontics. WB Saunders, 2004. p. 190–93.
    1. Foley J, O’Neill M. Use of mobile telephone short message service (SMS) as a reminder: the effect on patient attendance. Eur Arch Paediatr Dent. 2009;10(1):15–18. doi: 10.1007/BF03262661.
    1. Melzack R, Wall PD. Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science. 1965;150(3699):971–979. doi: 10.1126/science.150.3699.971.
    1. Bartlett BW, Firestone AR, Vig KW, Beck FM, Marucha PT. The influence of a structured telephone call on orthodontic pain and anxiety. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(4):435–441. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.06.033.
    1. Keith DJ, Rinchuse DJ, Kennedy M, Zullo T. Effect of text message follow-up on patient’s self-reported level of pain and anxiety. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(4):605–610. doi: 10.2319/091812-742.1.
    1. Cozzani M, et al. Self-reported pain after orthodontic treatments: a randomized controlled study on the effects of two follow-up procedures. Eur J Orthod. 2015; cjv032.
    1. Todesco LA, Keffer MA, Davis EL, Christersson LA. Effect of a social-cognitive intervention on oral health status, behavior reports and cognitions. J Periodontol. 1992;63:567–575. doi: 10.1902/jop.1992.63.7.567.
    1. Brent Bowen T, Rinchuse DJ, Zullo T, DeMaria ME. The influence of text messaging on oral hygiene effectiveness. Angle Orthod. 2014;85(4):543–548. doi: 10.2319/071514-495.1.
    1. Eppright M, Shroff B, Best AM, Barcoma E, Lindauer SJ. Influence of active reminders on oral hygiene compliance in orthodontic patients. Angle Orthod. 2013;84(2):208–213. doi: 10.2319/062813-481.1.
    1. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG, for the CONSORT Group CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trial. BMJ. 2010;340:c869. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c869.
    1. Silness J, Loe H. Periodontal disease in pregnancy correlation between oral hygiene and periodontal condition. Acta Odontol Scand. 1964;22:121–135. doi: 10.3109/00016356408993968.
    1. Al-Anezi SA, Harradine NW. Quantifying plaque during orthodontic treatment: a systematic review. Angle Orthod. 2011;82(4):748–753. doi: 10.2319/050111-312.1.
    1. Jackson K, Hackenberg TD. Token reinforcement, choice, and self-control in pigeons. J Exp Anal Behav. 1996;66(1):29–49. doi: 10.1901/jeab.1996.66-29.
    1. Skinner BF. Science and human behavior. 1953.
    1. Feinmann C, Ong M, Harvey W, Harris M. Psychological factors influencing post-operative pain and analgesic consumption. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1987;25:285–292. doi: 10.1016/0266-4356(87)90067-2.
    1. Kleinknecht RA, Klepac RK, Alexander LD. Origins and characteristics of fear of dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc. 1973;86:842–848. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.1973.0165.
    1. Halpern J. What is clinical empathy? J Gen Intern Med. 2003;18(8):670–674. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.21017.x.
    1. Church K, De Oliveira R. What's up with whatsapp?: comparing mobile instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on Human-computer interaction with mobile devices and services. ACM, 2013. p. 352–61.
    1. Chiluwa I, Chimuanya L, Ajiboye E, Peter A. Texting and relationship: examining discourse strategies in negotiating and sustaining relationships using mobile phone. Covenant J Lang Stud (CJLS) 2015;3(2):15.
    1. Kasesniemi EL, Rautiainen P. 11 Mobile culture of children and teenagers in Finland. 2002. p. 170.
    1. Ito M. Mobile phones, Japanese youth, and the re-placement of social contact. In: Mobile communications. Springer London, 2005. p. 131–48.
    1. Battestini A, Setlur V, Sohn T. A large scale study of text-messaging use. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services. ACM, 2010. p. 229–38.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner