Patients’ experiences with the Forsus appliance

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate patients’ experiences with the Forsus appliance. METHODS: This questionnaire survey was focused on patients’ comprehensive experiences with Forsus, both initially and after several months of wearing, including the patients’ overall impressions of the appliance. The survey was conducted in 64 patients wearing Forsus. RESULTS: A high percentage of patients(83.7%) reported neutral to favorable experience with Forsus. 85.4% of patients reported gradual adaption to the appliance within 4 weeks. Cheek irritation was the most serious side effect (about 52%). Cheek irritation and other side effect disappeared over time. CONCLUSIONS: The Forsus appliance is relatively well accepted by patients. Most patients experience some discomfort and functional limitations at first. However, the side effect gradually diminishes with time, and the patients adapt to the appliance finally. Practitioners should be especially vigilant about problems of cheek irritation.

Key words: Forsus appliance, Class II malocclusion, Fixed functional appliances

CLC Number:

R783.5

TIAN Xiao-guang, WU Zi-zhong, ZHANG Shi-jie, ZHANG Miao, LIN Xian-jun. Patients’ experiences with the Forsus appliance[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2014, 23(2): 209-213.

References

[1] McNamara JA Jr. Components of a class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age [J]. Angle Orthod, 1981, 51(3): 177-202.
[2] Proffit WR, Fields HW, Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey[J]. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg, 1998, 13(2): 97-106.
[3] Clark W. Functional treatment objectives [C]//Nanda R, Kapila S. Current Therapy in Orthodontics[M]. St. Louis: Mosby Elsevier, 2010: 87-102.
[4] 戴娟, 段银钟, 葛尚军, 等. 安氏 Ⅱ1类错下颌后缩儿童经Herbst矫治器治疗后的肌电研究[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2003, 38(2): 158-159.
[5] Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, et al. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients[J]. Angle Orthod, 2011, 81(4): 678-683.
[6] O'Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, et al. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or Twin block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2003, 124(2): 128-137.
[7] H?gg U, Taranger J. Skeletal stages of the hand and wrist as indicators of the pubertal growth spurt [J]. Acta Odontol Scand, 1980, 38(3): 187-200.
[8] Heinig N, G?z G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid [J]. J Orofac Orthop, 2001, 62(6): 436-450.
[9] De Felippe NL, Da Silveira AC, Viana G, et al. Influence of palatal expanders on oral comfort, speech, and mastication [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2010, 137(1): 48-53.
[10] Stewart FN, Kerr WJS, Taylor PJS. Appliance wear: the patient's point of view [J]. Eur J Orthod, 1997, 19(4): 377-382.
[11] Mandall N, Vine S, Hulland R, et al. The impact of fixed orthodontic appliances on daily life [J]. Community Dent Health, 2006, 23(2): 69-74.
[12] De Almeida MR, Henriques JF, Ursi W. Comparative study of the Fr?nkel (FR-2) and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2002, 121(5): 458-466.
[13] Konik M, Pancherz H, Hansen K. The mechanism of Class II correction in late Herbst treatment [J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1997, 112(1): 87-91.
[14] Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, et al. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics [J]. Angle Orthod, 2008, 78(2): 332-338.
[15] Sergl H, Klages U, Zentner A. Pain and discomfort during orthodontic treatment: causative factors and effects on compliance[J].