Investigation on Level of Practice and Attitude of Dentists Toward Space Maintainers as an Essential Intervention for Premature Loss or Extraction of Primary Teeth(A field study in Bani Waleed, Libya)

Buthaina Abdalsalam khamkham; Waed Alfaytouri Almaqroush; Alaa SalahAldin Ali

doi:10.58916/jhas.v8i3.177

Authors

Buthaina Abdalsalam khamkham Department Of Dental Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Bani Waleed University, Libya Author
Waed Alfaytouri Almaqroush Department Of Dental Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Bani Waleed University, Libya Author
Alaa SalahAldin Ali Department Of Dental Technology, Faculty of Medical Technology, Bani Waleed University, Libya Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58916/jhas.v8i3.177

Keywords:

Primary teeth, premature loss, preventive orthodontic, space maintainers

Abstract

Abstract: Premature loss of primary teeth is one of the most frequent issues affecting children's dental growth and development. The premature loss of primary teeth causes the migration of adjacent teeth into the lost space and prevents permanent teeth from erupting. This leads to a number of dental discrepancies, including malocclusion and loss of the dental arch, that require early preventive measures. The use of space maintainers appliances through safe yet is one of the most popular preventative methods, but it requires proper knowledge and practical expertise to produce effective therapy results. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the level of practice and attitude among dentists in Bani Waleed, Libya, about the possibility of using space maintainers and their prevalence as an essential intervention for premature loss or extraction of primary teeth. A descriptive, cross-sectional, questionnaire-based study was distributed among dentists. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze the filled-out questionnaires (IBM, NY, USA, Version 26.0). The results revealed that (69.1%) did not utilize space maintainers. The majority of the sample (71%) uses Band and loop space maintainers. Cost (36.4%) was the major reason for not using space maintainers, followed by parental refusal (25.4%), (21.9%) claimed that patients aren’t compliant with follow-up, and (16.3%) of them pointed to time-consuming. From this, It can be concluded that numerous dentists don’t use space maintainers as an essential intervention to avoid malocclusion when there is premature loss of the primary teeth. However, Significant numbers of dentists place space maintainers one week after tooth extraction.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Vij AA, Reddy A. Using digital impressions to fabricate space maintainers: A case report. Clin Case Rep. 2020.

Ramakrishnan M, Dhanalakshmi R, Subramanian EMG. Survival rate of different fixed posterior space maintainers used in Paediatric Dentistry - A systematic review. Saudi Dent J. 2019 Apr;31(2):165–72.

Vinothini V, Sanguida A, Selvabalaji A, Prathima GS, Kavitha M. Functional Band and Loop Space Maintainers in Children. Case Rep Dent. 2019.

Shulman E. Fabrication of a Band and Loop Space Maintainer [Internet]. Vol. 7, MedEdPORTAL. 2011.

Aditya LR, Gartika M, Primarti RS. Evaluasi kepatuhan perawatan space maintainer lepasan pada anakChildren compliance evaluation on removable space maintainer treatment [Internet]. Vol. 30, Jurnal Kedokteran Gigi Universitas Padjadjaran. 2018. p. 51.

Raviteja NVK, Prasad MG. Clinical Evaluation of Ghana Shyam’s TEFF (Telescopically Expanding Fixed Functional) Space Maintainer Versus Conventional Band and Loop Space Maintainer [Internet]. Vol. 20, Pesquisa Brasileiraem Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2020.

Chunawala Y, Morawala A, Ambiye A, Jain K, Kataria S. Clinical Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Glass Fiber reinforced Composite Space Maintainer vs Band-and-loop Space Maintainer following Loss of Primary Teeth: An in vivo Study [Internet]. Vol. 1, International Journal of Clinical Dentistry and Research. 2017.

Qudeimat MA, Fayle SA. The longevity of space maintainers: a retrospective study. Pediatr Dent. 1998. 20; 267-272.

Kirzioglu Z, Erturk SO. Success of reinforced fiber material space maintainer. J Den Child-2004. 71; 158-162.

Dr. P. S. Krithika, Dr. Joyson Moses MDS., Dr. R. Sharanya MDS, Dr. Pallavi. C, Dr. Kalpana. H. Knowledge of Dental Practitioner on Space Maintainers as Treatment Modality for Premature Loss of Primary Teeth. Volume-8, issue-3, march-2019.

Krejcie, R &Morgan, D. (1970), Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 30, 607-610.

Olsen, N.H. Space maintenance. Dent Clin N Amer 1959. 59; 339-53.

Kargul, B, Caglar, E, Kabalay. U. Glass fiber reinforced composite resin space maintainer: case reports. J Dent Child (Clinc). 2003. 70: 258-61.

Kargul, B, Caglar, E, Kabalay. U. Glass fiber-reinforced composite resin as fixed space maintainers in children: 12-month clinic follow-up. J Dent Child (Clinc). 2005. 72: 109-112.

Yilmaz, Y, Kocogullari, M. E, Belduz, N. Fixed space maintainers combined with open-face stainless steel crowns. J ContempDent. Pract. 2006. 1: 95-103.

Simsek, S. Yilmaz, Y Gurbuz, T. Clinical evaluation of simple fixed space maintainers bonded with flow composite resin. . J Dent Child (Clinc). 2004. 71: 163-168.

Barberia, E, Lucavechi, T, Carenas, D, Maroto, M. Free-end space maintainers: design, Utilization and advantages. J Clin Pediatr Dent, 2006. 31: 5-8.

Lindemeyer, R.G, Glavich, G.G. Space maintainer for the loss of a permanent molar in the adolescent patient: Report of case. J Dent Child 1996. 63; 213-215.