Logotipo do repositório
 

Publicação:
Esthetic perception of clear aligner therapy attachments using eye-tracking technology

dc.contributor.authorThai, Jessica Kimberly
dc.contributor.authorAraujo, Eustaquio
dc.contributor.authorMcCray, Julie
dc.contributor.authorSchneider, Patricia Pigato [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorKim, Ki Beom
dc.contributor.institutionPrivate practice
dc.contributor.institutionSaint Louis University
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-12T02:13:05Z
dc.date.available2020-12-12T02:13:05Z
dc.date.issued2020-09-01
dc.description.abstractIntroduction: The purpose of this research was to assess and compare esthetic perceptions of clear aligner therapy with attachments and esthetic brackets by measuring differences in eye fixations using eye-tracking technology. Methods: The sample involved 250 adult subjects. The subjects gave verbal consent, then viewed photographs showing 4 variations of orthodontic appliances: clear aligner control with minimal attachments, clear aligner with anterior and posterior attachments, esthetic brackets, and clear aligner with posterior attachments. Images were displayed for 6 seconds each on a computer monitor. Location and time to first fixation, total fixation duration, and total visit count and duration for each type of appliance were measured. Subjects were then asked to complete an online survey. Results: Participants spent the least amount of time looking at the photograph of the control, followed by those of the ceramic brackets, posterior attachments, and anterior and/or posterior attachments. The anterior and/or posterior image had the least number of visits but garnered the longest visit duration (1.32 visits averaging 0.74 seconds per visit). This was followed by the images of the posterior attachments (1.40 visits, 0.70 seconds per visit), ceramic brackets (1.43 visits, 0.65 seconds per visit), and minimal attachments control (1.45 visits, 0.61 seconds per visit). The hierarchy of most preferred appliances across all 250 respondents was as follows: minimal attachments control, ceramic brackets, posterior attachments, and anterior and/or posterior attachments. Overall, 88.4% of subjects would compromise appliance esthetics during treatment for a better outcome (n = 221). Conclusions: Eye-tracking data show that time to the first fixation was negatively correlated with its survey ranking and that an increase in attachments led to an increase in total fixation duration. There is a general desire for clear aligners without attachments and ceramic brackets over clear aligners with multiple attachments. Survey data suggest that although respondents viewed appliance esthetics as highly important, nearly all would compromise appliance esthetics during treatment if it resulted in a better outcome.en
dc.description.affiliationPrivate practice
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Orthodontics Saint Louis University
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Orthodontics School of Dentistry of Araraquara São Paulo State University (UNESP) Araraquara
dc.description.affiliationUnespDepartment of Orthodontics School of Dentistry of Araraquara São Paulo State University (UNESP) Araraquara
dc.format.extent400-409
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.09.014
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, v. 158, n. 3, p. 400-409, 2020.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.09.014
dc.identifier.issn0889-5406
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85087220324
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/200674
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
dc.sourceScopus
dc.titleEsthetic perception of clear aligner therapy attachments using eye-tracking technologyen
dc.typeArtigopt
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationca4c0298-cd82-48ee-a9c8-c97704bac2b0
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryca4c0298-cd82-48ee-a9c8-c97704bac2b0
unesp.author.orcid0000-0002-9678-6524[2]
unesp.author.orcid0000-0003-3475-2078[3]
unesp.campusUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), Faculdade de Odontologia, Araraquarapt
unesp.departmentClínica Infantil - FOARpt

Arquivos