Search

Context: The goals of orthodontic therapy are to provide stable treatment results and the best possible tooth alignment. Orthodontic retention regimens are essential for avoiding relapses after treatment; however, there is ongoing discussion on the best regimen. Methods: Orthodontic patients treated at a tertiary care center were the subject of a retrospective analysis. Information was gathered about follow‑up evaluations, treatment techniques, patient demographics, and retention procedures. Relapse rates and occlusal characteristics were among the objective variables used to evaluate treatment stability. A statistical analysis evaluated the effectiveness of various retention strategies. Findings: When it came to preserving treatment stability, fixed retainers outperformed detachable appliances, Hawley retainers, and Essix retainers. The mean changes in occlusal parameters and relapse rates were greater for removable appliances, but the performance of Hawley and Essix retainers was moderate. Significant variations in retention techniques were verified by statistical analysis, with fixed retainers outperforming alternative detachable retainers and removable appliances. In conclusion, compared to alternative detachable retainers and removable equipment, fixed retainers are more successful in preserving treatment stability. Retention protocols, however, must to be established with each patient’s needs and treatment preferences in mind. The length of patient compliance and retention has a crucial role in determining the stability of therapy, underscoring the significance of patient education and continued monitoring. To improve long‑term treatment results and optimize orthodontic retention techniques, further research and technical developments are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Low vaccination rates, especially in rural regions, and vaccine hesitancy are serious problems for public health. The goal of this study is to determine whether the BeSD (Behavioral Support for Vaccination) tool has a positive impact on parents who live in rural areas near Visakhapatnam who choose to vaccinate their children. The BeSD tool is made to help people make educated decisions about immunizing their children and to alleviate vaccination hesitancy. Methods: To assess the effect of the BeSD tool on immunization uptake, a quantitative research technique was used. Using a standardized questionnaire, a sample of 374 parents from rural areas near Visakhapatnam were questioned. The survey had parts on vaccination uptake, risk factors for vaccine hesitancy, and the use and efficacy of the BeSD tool. A statistical analysis of the data was done using the right techniques. Results: According to this study's findings, 64.17% of the parents who participated in the survey said their children had received all recommended vaccinations, 23.00% said their children had received some vaccinations, and 12.83% said they had not. Lack of knowledge (32.09%), safety worries (20.86%), and a lack of faith in vaccines (17.38%) were all factors in vaccine hesitation. The BeSD tool's use led to a 64.17% vaccine uptake among the intervention group. Conclusion: The findings of this study show that the BeSD tool has the potential to increase vaccination rates among parents who live in rural areas close to Visakhapatnam. The BeSD tool can assist increase immunization rates and contribute to better public health outcomes by addressing vaccine reluctance through focused interventions, such as offering information and support. The results highlight the significance of specialized approaches to overcoming vaccine reluctance in rural communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Orthodontic treatment may bring about changes in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc. Hence, we aim to assess the impact of the orthodontic tooth movement on the articular disc repositioning of TMJ. Materials and Methods: We conducted an observational prospective study among 50 class IIdiv-I subjects. The magnetic resonance images were used to evaluate TMJ during the orthodontic treatments. The phases were T1-start of treatment, T2-thru phase I, T3-at the end of phase I, and T4-at the end of phase II. The qualitative values were compared for the disc changes. Results: No significant changes in the disc position or the regression were seen with open or closed mouth between T1-T3, T3-T4, and T1-T4. Significant variation for the position of the disc was seen in the opened mouth between T3-T4. Significant variation for the form of the disc was seen when closed at T1-T2 and T2-T3. Conclusions: Disc of the TMJ maintained the form and position during the treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: One of the hormones that are crucial in safe pregnancy is the Progesterone. Its defect may cause bleeding and abortion. Hence, in this study, we evaluated two different drug modalities of progesterone for their efficacy. Material and Methods: We piloted a prospective observational study among 100 pregnant women in their first trimester. They were divided to two equal groups to receive oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone. The clinical and the demographic data with detailed history were taken and noted. The patients were followed up till the pervaginal bleeding stopped and till second trimester end. The comparisons were made between the groups using Chi square test deliberating P < 0.05 as significant. Results: The age, BMI, and the progesterone levels were comparable between the groups. No significant difference between the groups was seen for the adverse reactions and for the continuation of pregnancy till 24 weeks. However, there was a significant variation in the cessation of the pervaginal bleeding, with lower time for the oral dydrogesterone. Conclusion: Compared to the vaginal progesterone, oral dydrogesterone performed better in preventing the pervaginal bleeding and prolonging the viability of the pregnancy till the second trimester end. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the long-term results of orthodontic treatment with traditional braces and Invisalign, with a particular emphasis on treatment length, patient satisfaction, correction of malocclusion, and long-term stability., Methods: Between 2020 and 2022, individuals who had orthodontic treatment at a tertiary care center had their data analysed. Patients with mild to severe malocclusions treated with conventional braces or Invisalign between the ages of 12 and 18 met the inclusion criteria. Assessments were done on results, length of treatment, degree of malocclusion, and long-term stability. With significance set at P < 0.05, statistical analyses comprised t-tests for treatment duration and Chi-square testing for malocclusion correction., Findings: The mean treatment time for Invisalign was much shorter (18 months) than for conventional braces (24 months) ( P < 0.001). With 88-90% success rates, both techniques demonstrated remarkable success rates in malocclusion treatment. Even though Invisalign was associated with a somewhat greater percentage of relapse instances, the difference was not statistically significant ( P > 0.05)., Conclusion: In conclusion, Invisalign showed a much shorter treatment period than conventional braces, yet both showed excellent malocclusion correction. The choice of modality should be based on patient satisfaction, treatment objectives, and case complexity, taking into account the trade-offs between treatment length and potential variations in long-term stability., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)

Background: Orthodontic retention protocols are crucial for maintaining treatment stability post-orthodontic treatment. However, the optimal retention strategy remains debated., Methods: A retrospective analysis of patient records from a tertiary orthodontic center over 5 years was conducted. Variables, including retention protocols employed, duration of retention, and treatment stability, were weighed., Results: Fixed retainers were the most commonly utilized retention protocol, followed by removable retainers and combination methods. Although the incidence of treatment relapse appeared higher among patients with removable retainers, the difference did not reach statistical significance. Combination protocols demonstrated comparable treatment stability to fixed retainers., Conclusion: This research gives understanding of the effectiveness of orthodontic retention protocols in a tertiary center setting. While fixed retainers remain widely used, removable retainers and combination methods also show promise in maintaining treatment stability. Addressing patient compliance issues and optimizing retention strategies based on individual patient needs are essential for enhancing treatment outcomes., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences.)