| 1. |
- Bergvall, Hanna, et al.
(författare)
-
Gender differences in self-assessment among dental students at an ”Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE).
- 2014
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Objective: The objective of this study was to compare dental student’s real/practical results at an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) with their self-assessed results. These results were compared depending on gender. Introduction: There are several studies published comparing differences in self-assessment between women and men in theoretical exams. However, knowledge is lacking in regards to clinical examinations. At theoretical examinations, it has been found that men tend to over-estimate their performance more frequently than women do. Whether these differences in self-assessment exist because men tend to over-estimate themselves, women tend to under-estimate themselves, a combination of both or that self-assessments actually are consistent with the results at the examination, vary between different studies. Materials and methods: All students (35 women and 16 men) at the sixth semester at Malmö Dental School were examined with an OSCE with 13 stations. The student’s real results at OSCE were compared with their self-assessment at each station. The assessments were compared regarding gender. Results: At most of the 13 stations there were no significant differences in over- and under-estimation regarding women and men. It was more difficult for men to assess their performance regarding impression with alginate. These misjudgments were mainly caused by over-estimation. There were no results indicating that women under-estimate their performance at greater extent than men. Conclusion: Contrary to studies where gender differences concerning self-assessment in theoretical examinations are observed, the present study found no significant differences in over- and under-estimation between women and men.
|
|
| 2. |
- Edman Tynelius, Gudrun, et al.
(författare)
-
A cost-minimization analysis of an RCT of three retention methods
- 2014
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 36:4, s. 436-441
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- SUMMARY BACKGROUND: There are few cost evaluation studies of orthodontic retention treatment. The aim of this study was to compare the costs in a randomized controlled trial of three retention methods during 2 years of retention treatment. MATERIALS/METHODS: To determine which alternative has the lower cost, a cost-minimization analysis (CMA) was undertaken, based on that the outcome of the treatment alternatives was equivalent. The study comprised 75 patients in 3 groups consisting of 25 each. The first group had a vacuum-formed retainer (VFR) in the maxilla and a cuspid retainer in the mandible (group V-CTC), the second group had a VFR in the maxilla combined with stripping of the incisors and cuspids in the mandible (group V-S), and the third group had a prefabricated positioner (group P). Direct cost (premises, staff salaries, material and laboratory costs) and indirect costs (loss of time at school) were calculated. Societal costs were defined as the sum of direct and indirect costs. RESULTS: The societal costs/patient for scheduled appointments for 2 years of retention treatment in group V-CTC were €497, group V-S €451 and group P €420. Societal costs for unscheduled appointments in group V-CTC were €807 and in group V-S €303. In group P, there were no unscheduled appointments. CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: After 2 years of retention in compliant patients, the cuspid retainer was the least cost-effective retention appliance. The CMA showed that for a clinically similar result, there were differences in societal costs, but treatment decisions should always be performed on an individual basis.
|
|
| 3. |
- Edman Tynelius, Gudrun, et al.
(författare)
-
A randomized controlled trial of three orthodontic retention methods in Class I four premolar extraction cases : stability after 2 years in retention
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Orthodontics & craniofacial research. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 1601-6335 .- 1601-6343. ; 16:2, s. 105-115
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three different retention methods in compliant patients after 2 years of retention. DESIGN: Three group randomized controlled trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample was recruited from patients having their fixed appliance treatment between 2001 and 2007. Seventy-five patients (45 girls and 30 boys with a mean age of 14.4 years at start of retention) were randomized into three retention methods: vacuum-formed retainer in the maxilla and bonded canine-to-canine retainer in the mandible (Group V-CTC), vacuum-formed retainer in the maxilla combined with stripping of the 10 proximal surfaces of the lower mandibular anterior teeth (Group V-S) and prefabricated positioner covering the teeth in the maxilla and the mandible (Group P). The following linear measurements were performed: Little's irregularity index (LII), intercanine width, intermolar width, arch length, overjet, overbite and body height growth. Registrations were made before orthodontic treatment, at start of retention, after 12 and finally 24 months in retention. Differences in means between groups were tested by one-way analysis of variance (SPSS). RESULTS: After 2 years all three retention methods were successful in retaining orthodontic treatment results. The major part of relapse took place during the 1st year of retention. CONCLUSIONS: All 3 types of retention methods were equally effective in controlling relapse to a clinically acceptable level.
|
|
| 4. |
- Edman Tynelius, Gudrun, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of orthodontic treatment after 1 year of retention - a randomized trial
- 2010
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 32:5, s. 542-547
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aim of this study was to use a randomized controlled trial methodology to evaluate and compare three different retention methods. The capacity of the retention methods to retain orthodontic treatment results was in this first phase analysed on a short-term basis, i.e. after 1 year of retention. The subjects were recruited from adolescents undergoing fixed appliance treatment at an orthodontic clinic in the National Health Service (NHS) in Sweden between 2001 and 2007. Seventy-five patients (45 girls and 30 boys with a mean age of 14.4 years at the start of retention) were randomized into three retention systems; a vacuum-formed retainer in the maxilla and bonded canine-to-canine retainer in the mandible (group V-CTC), a vacuum-formed retainer in the maxilla combined with stripping of the 10 proximal surfaces of the lower mandibular anterior teeth (group V-S), and a prefabricated positioner covering the teeth in the maxilla and mandible (group P). The main outcome measures were: Little's irregularity index (LII), intercanine and intermolar width, arch length, overjet, and overbite. Registrations were made before orthodontic treatment, when the fixed orthodontic appliance was removed, and after 12 months in retention. Differences in means between groups were tested by one-way analysis of variance. After 1 year of retention, no clinically significant difference in retention capacity was found between the three retention methods. Small but significant differences (P < 0.05) were observed between the V-CTC and V-S groups regarding mandibular canine width, mandibular arch length, and overbite. In group P, two patients failed to co-operate.
|
|
