MyMedR

Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Sectional Fixed Orthodontic Extrusion Technique in Management of Teeth with Complicated Crown-Root Fractures: Report of Two Cases

M P Sockalingam SN, Kong Loh Seu K, Mohamed Noor H, Irfani Zakaria AS

Case Rep Dent, 2018;2018:8715647.
PMID: 29581902 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8715647

Complicated crown-root fractures account for a small percentage of traumatic dental injuries seen in children; however, management of these injuries can be very challenging to clinicians. Factors such as complexity of the injury, patient's age and dentition stage, patient's cooperation, and parental demands may have some bearing on the type of treatment undertaken and its outcomes. In some children, these injuries may have significant impact on their quality of life. The purpose of this article is to describe two cases of complicated crown-root fracture which were successfully managed through orthodontic extrusion using a sectional fixed orthodontic technique. The basis for the treatment technique and its favourable outcomes were highlighted with its advantages and drawbacks.
Fulltext Comparisons of Clients' and Caregivers' Satisfaction Across Conventional, Virtual, and Hybrid Speech-Language Therapy Services in Malaysia

Hassan FH, Zakaria AS, Ahmad Rusli Y, Haris SM, Mohd Azraai H

Patient Prefer Adherence, 2023;17:1731-1740.
PMID: 37492636 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S407347

PURPOSE: This study compared the satisfaction of recipients of conventional speech-language therapy (C-SLT), speech-language teletherapy (SLTT), and hybrid speech-language therapy (H-SLT), and determined sociodemographic factors that affect their satisfaction.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants were clients and caregivers of a speech-language clinic at a public university. Services were primarily provided by student clinicians, who were undergoing supervised clinical training. An online survey was distributed, which consisted of three sections: Background Information, Overall Satisfaction in SLT, and Satisfaction in SLTT. All participants completed the first two sections, while the third section was completed only by those who experienced SLTT or H-SLT.
RESULTS: Most of the respondents were caregivers (89.7%), female (79.4%), of Malay ethnicity (80.9%), have received tertiary education (77.9%), within the low-income category (66.2%), held a job (76.5%), and resided in central West Malaysia (83.8%). Many participants experienced C-SLT (51%), followed by H-SLT (34%), and SLTT (15%). There were no significant differences in the overall satisfaction of the participants across three modes of services delivery (F[2,67] = 0.02, p = 0.95), and in the satisfaction with teletherapy between the H-SLT and SLTT groups (t = 0.90, p = 0.38). Income was the only sociodemographic factor that was correlated with the satisfaction level in teletherapy (r = 0.37, p = 0.04).
Evaluation of Satisfaction Levels Following Orthognathic Treatment in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review

Almasri AMH, Hajeer MY, Sultan K, Aljabban O, Zakaria AS, Alhaffar JB

Cureus, 2024 Nov;16(11):e73846.
PMID: 39552740 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.73846

Dentofacial deformities can significantly impact an individual's quality of life, affecting facial aesthetics, self-esteem, and overall well-being. The combined orthognathic surgery-orthodontic treatment is the preferred approach for correcting moderate-to-severe deformities. However, patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgery remains a crucial outcome measure, influenced by various factors, including the type of malocclusion, surgical procedure, and demographic characteristics. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the available evidence regarding patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgery, exploring the effects of the type of malocclusion, surgical procedure, age, and gender on satisfaction rates, addressing a gap left by previous outdated reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed®, Scopus®, Web of Science™, and Embase®. Eligibility criteria were defined using the PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design) framework. Cochrane's ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions) tool was employed for non-randomized intervention studies within clinical controlled trials to assess the risk of bias. In parallel, a revised version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale determined the methodological quality of cohort and cross-sectional studies. Sixteen studies were analyzed, revealing satisfaction levels ranging from 83% to 100%. Findings indicate that class III malocclusion patients report higher satisfaction than class II patients and satisfaction varies based on surgical type, with bimaxillary procedures generally yielding better outcomes. While most studies found no significant correlation between satisfaction and demographic factors such as age and gender, some suggested younger patients may express higher satisfaction and that female patients might report lower satisfaction levels. The review highlights the importance of effective patient communication and expectation management in achieving optimal satisfaction outcomes in orthognathic surgery. Limitations such as memory bias and methodological diversity across studies restrict the ability to perform meta-analyses, underscoring the need for further research in this area.
Evaluation of the Impact of Orthodontic Treatment on Patients' Self-Esteem: A Systematic Review

Shaadouh RI, Hajeer MY, Burhan AS, Ajaj MA, Jaber ST, Zakaria AS, et al.

Cureus, 2023 Oct;15(10):e48064.
PMID: 37920628 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.48064

Malocclusion may affect interpersonal relationships, self-esteem (SE), and psychological well-being, weakening patients' psychological and social activities. Several studies investigated the effect of orthodontic treatment on these social and psychological aspects, such as SE. However, the direct relationship between SE and orthodontic treatment has not yet been confirmed. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the existing evidence in the literature concerning the influences of orthodontic treatment on patients' SE systematically and critically. An electronic search in the following databases was done in September 2022: PubMed®, Web of Science™, Scopus®, Embase®, GoogleTM Scholar, Cochrane Library databases, Trip, and OpenGrey. Then, the reference list of each candidate study was checked for any potentially linked papers that the electronic search might not have turned up. Inclusion criteria were set according to the population/intervention/comparison/outcome/study design (PICOS) framework. For the data collection and analysis, two reviewers extracted data separately. The risk of bias 2 (RoB-2) and the risk of bias in non-randomized studies (ROBINS-I) tools were used to assess the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, respectively. The grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) approach was employed to evaluate the quality of the evidence for each finding. Sixteen studies (five RCTs, seven cohorts, and four cross-sectional) were included in this review. Unfortunately, the results could not be pooled into a meta-analysis. Only six studies have reported an increase in SE after orthodontic treatment (P<0.05 in these studies). No agreement between the included studies was observed regarding the influence of fixed orthodontic treatment, gender, or age on SE. The quality of evidence supporting these findings ranged from very low to low. There is low evidence indicating that fixed orthodontic treatment can improve patients' SE. In addition, unclear data are available about the influence of patients' gender and age on SE after orthodontic treatment. Therefore, high-quality RCTs are required to develop stronger evidence about this issue.
Patient Satisfaction Following Orthodontic Treatment: A Systematic Review

Almasri AMH, Hajeer MY, Ajaj MA, Almusawi AOA, Jaber ST, Zakaria AS, et al.

Cureus, 2024 Jul;16(7):e65339.
PMID: 39055972 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.65339

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become increasingly important in orthodontic treatment as they reflect patients' perceptions of treatment outcomes. Understanding patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is crucial for improving healthcare delivery and patient-centered care. This systematic review aimed to critically appraise the evidence regarding patient satisfaction after orthodontic treatment, exploring the effects of different treatment types, patient demographics, and other factors on satisfaction levels. Eight electronic bibliographic databases were searched without publication time or language restrictions, including PubMed®, Scopus®, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science™, Embase®, Google™ Scholar, Trip, and OpenGrey. A manual search was conducted on the references in the included papers. Eligibility criteria were established based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) framework. Studies were included if they reported patient satisfaction levels following orthodontic treatment using standardized questionnaires. Two reviewers independently collected and analyzed the data. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB2) for randomized clinical trials, and the methodologic quality for cohort and cross-sectional studies was assessed using the modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fourteen studies employed various questionnaires and timings to gauge post-orthodontic treatment satisfaction. Patient satisfaction levels were generally high, with most studies reporting satisfaction rates above 91%. Fixed orthodontic appliances were associated with higher satisfaction levels compared to removable appliances. While age and gender did not significantly influence satisfaction, the quality of care and doctor-patient relationships were crucial factors in patient satisfaction. This systematic review proves that patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is generally high, with fixed appliances and positive doctor-patient relationships contributing to higher satisfaction levels. However, the quality of the evidence was moderate to low, highlighting the need for further high-quality clinical studies in this area.