About this trial
Expansion of the arches is generally considered highly unstable and prone to relapse regardless of the type of expansion. Retention appliances play a vital role in preserving these changes. Hawley retainer users often avoid wearing them due to speech difficulties and less aesthetic appeal. They are also more prone to breakage, costlier, and require more labour. Despite the relatively recent introduction of 3D-printed retainers, they offer potential advantages in orthodontics, including the accuracy of digitally scanned images, reduced labour and material costs, and improved patient comfort. While 3D-printed retainers are quite new, most studies focus on laboratory testing of their mechanical properties, there is limited evidence directly comparing their effectiveness in retaining arch width increases, patient acceptance, and cost estimation. This knowledge gap creates uncertainty about the optimal choice of retainer for long-term stability, necessitating a comparative assessment of their performance. This study addresses this knowledge gap by evaluating the retention of arch width increases achieved using Hawley retainers versus 3D-printed retainers
Eligibility criteria
Qualifiers
Patients aged 16 years or older at the time of debonding
Treatment plan of extraction or non-extraction followed by straight wire appliances in the upper arch only or both arches
Undergone expansion treatment in the upper arch causing an arch width increase of 3-10mm, either using a Quadhelix, expansion with archwires, or URA with midline screw
Had pretreatment dental cast
Disqualifiers
Cleft lip and palate
Chronic medical conditions
Broken teeth or bubbles on study model at site of measurement.
Trial design
Treatments tested in this trial
- 3D printed retainer
- Hawley retainer
Treatment groups
Sponsors and collaborators
National University of Malaysia
Lead sponsor
University of Malaya
Collaborator
Universiti Teknologi Mara
Collaborator