Comparison Between Efficacy of Four Different Types of Orthodontic Separators
Published: August 1, 2014 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/.4755
Manjunath A Malagan, Biswas P P, Sunil Muddaiah, Rami Reddy, B K Shetty, Jyosna Preetham, Sanjay Naduwinmani, Sujeet Singh
1. Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Karnataka Lingayat Education, Vishwanath Katti Institute of Dental Sciences, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.
2. Professor and HOD, Department of Othodontics, Royal dental college, Chalissery,Palghat Dist,Kerala, India.
3. Professor and HOD, Department of Orthodontics, Coorg Institute of Dental Sciences,Virajpet, Karnataka, India.
4. Professor and HOD, Department of Orhtodontics, Jodhpur dental College General Hospital, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
5. Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Coorg Institute of Dental Sciences,Virajpet, Karnataka, India.
6. Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Vasantdada patil Dental College & Hospital, Kavalapur, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
7. Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Maratha Mandal’s Nathajirao G Halgekar Institute od Dental Sciences & Research. Belgaum, Karnataka, India.
8. Senior Resident, Department of Orthodontics, S N Medical College & Hospital, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Correspondence
Dr. Manjunath A Malagan,
Department of Orthodontics, Karnataka Lingayat Education, Vishwanath Katti Institute of Dental Sciences,
Belgaum, Karnataka, India.
Phone : 9480006692, Email : drmanjunath_malaghan@yahoo.com
Aim: To evaluate the rapidity and amount of separation of four different types of separators (i.e. Elastomeric separators, Dumbbell separators, Kesling springs and NEET springs) and also the percentage of loss of these separators.
Materials and Methods: The separating effect of 4 different types of separators (i.e. Elastomeric separators, Dumbbell separators, Kesling springs and NEET springs) were assessed for 3 days, and the separated space between molars and premolars were noted separately for three consecutive days. The number and types of lost separators were recorded at the same time. The amount of separation between molars and 2nd premolar in each quadrant was measured separately with a leaf gauge (sensitivity 5/100mm) and noted on each day.
Results: Dumbbell separators proved to be the fastest in producing separation and they produced consistently greater amount of separation on all three days.
Conclusions: The Dumbbell separator would be ideal for situations where in rapid separation is needed, and also in cases where in the patient comes with the loss of separators.
[
FULL TEXT ] | [ PDF]