Evaluation of the use of low-level laser therapy in pain control in orthodontic patients: A randomized split-mouth clinical trial

Comparative efficacy of pharmaceutical (Ibuprofen) and non-pharmaceutical (photobiomodulation, and chewing gum) interventions for pain reduction after elastomeric separator placement in orthodontic patients: a randomized clinical trial

This study compared the efficacy of pharmaceutical (ibuprofen) and non-pharmaceutical (photobiomodulation and chewing gum) interventions for pain reduction after elastomeric separator placement in orthodontic patients. This 3-arm, parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted on 90 orthodontic patients. The level of anxiety and pain threshold of patients were measured at baseline using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) and an algometer, respectively. The patients were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 30; equal number of males and females). In the laser group, 940 nm diode laser (Epic X, Biolase, USA, 12.35 J/cm2 energy density and 300 mW power in continuous-wave mode., The cross-sectional area of the laser handpiece tip was 1.7 cm2.) was irradiated to the buccal and lingual surfaces for 35 s each, prior to placement of separators. In the gum group, the patients were asked to chew a piece of sugar-free gum immediately after the placement of separators and repeat every 8 h for 5 min for one week in case of pain. In the ibuprofen group, patients received 400 mg ibuprofen (Hakim Pharmaceuticals, Tehran, Iran) after the placement of separators and were asked to take one tablet every 8 h for one week in case of pain. The pain score was recorded using the Modified McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). The normality of data distribution was analyzed by the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. ANOVA was applied to compare age, and the Chi-square and Monte Carlo Chi-square tests were used to compare gender and patient responses to the questions among the groups. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to compare the pain score at different time points and among the three groups. All statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 19 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) at 0.05 level of significance. Data analysis in this study had an intention to treat approach. Although the pain score was slightly lower in ibuprofen and gum groups, the difference among the three groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). 'Repeated measures ANOVA showed no significant effect of method of pain reduction on pain score (F = 1.520, P = 0.225). Time had a significant effect on pain score (F = 20.310, P < 0.001). The interaction effect of time and pain reduction method on pain score was not significant (F = 0.737, P = 0.651). patients experienced a lower level of pain in the ibuprofen and chewing gum groups, the difference in pain score was not significant among the three groups (P = 0.225). patients experienced a higher level of pain at 12 and 24 hours after the placement of separators in all groups. Considering the comparably equal analgesic efficacy of this modalities, non-pharmaceutical interventions can be used for pain reduction of elastomeric separator. The study protocol was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20210927052611N1). Date of registration 2022/03/14.

Clinical and preclinical evidence on the bioeffects and movement-related implications of photobiomodulation in the orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review

Photobiomodulation (PBM) has been demonstrated as a non-invasive and painless technique with great potential to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). However, there is a great inconsistency among PBM protocols and reported outcomes, probably due to the poor translatability of preclinical knowledge into early clinical practice. Hence, this review aims to fill this gap by establishing the state-of-the-art on both preclinical and clinical applications of PBM, and by comprehensively discussing the most suitable stimulation protocols described in the literature. This review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. A bibliographic search was carried out in the PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases using a combination of keywords. Only studies written in English were eligible and no time limit was applied. A total of 69 studies were selected for this review. The revised literature describes that PBM can effectively reduce orthodontic treatment time and produce analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects. We found that PBM of 640 ± 25, 830 ± 20 and 960 ± 20 nm, delivered at a minimum energy density per irradiation point of 5 J/cm2 daily or every other day sessions is robustly associated with increased tooth movement rate. Pain relief seems to be achieved with lower irradiation doses compared to those required for OTM acceleration. For the first time, the bioeffects induced by PBM for the acceleration of OTM are comprehensively discussed from a translational point of view. Collectively, the evidence from preclinical and clinical trials supports the use of PBM as a coadjuvant in orthodontics for enhancing tooth movement and managing treatment-associated discomfort. Overall, the revised studies indicate that optimal PBM parameters to stimulate tissue remodelling are wavelengths of 830 ± 20 nm and energy densities of 5-70 J/cm2 applied daily or every other day can maximize the OTM rate, while lower doses (up to 16 J/cm2 per session) delivered in non-consecutive days seem to be optimal for inducing analgesic effects. Future research should focus on optimizing laser parameters and treatment protocols customized for tooth and movement type. By fine-tuning laser parameters, clinicians can potentially reduce treatment times, improve patient comfort and achieve more predictable outcomes, making orthodontic care more efficient and patient-friendly, thus consolidating PBM usage in orthodontics.

Comparative Evaluation of the Effect of Photobiomodulation on Pain Reduction in Individuals Undergoing Segmental Retraction Using a Closing Loop: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Pain following orthodontic treatment is a common reason for apprehension and treatment discontinuation. Research on modalities to control pain in orthodontic patients has gained special attention. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is studied as an alternative pain management modality free of the adverse effects of analgesic medications.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) for pain control following the activation of a closing loop for canine retraction.

METHOD

This is a split-mouth, placebo-controlled, single-blinded randomized clinical trial that evaluated 16 patients who need canine retraction using closing loops. Two maxillary quadrants were allotted into test and control groups using the coin toss method. In the test group, a low-intensity laser with 810 nm wavelength for 60 seconds in pulsated non-contact mode was used in the buccal, palatal, mesial, and distal regions of the canine immediately after activating the loop. The control site received placebo radiation. The pain level was recorded 2, 24, 48, and 72 hours after intervention in the control and test groups using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The test and control groups were compared using Student's t-test. A p-value ≤0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 25.0 (Released 2017; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States).

RESULT

Both groups had a significant statistical difference in the pain score. The laser group showed a statistically significant lower pain score compared to the control group at all time points.

CONCLUSION

Photobiomodulation by 810 nm 300 mW diode laser can effectively reduce pain following the retraction of maxillary canines.

The effectiveness of low-level laser therapy and low-intensity pulsed ultrasound in reducing pain induced by orthodontic separation: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) have been recently applied to control pain during orthodontic treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of LLLT and LIPUS in reducing pain induced by orthodontic separation.

STUDY DESIGN

A single-blinded randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty patients were randomly assigned into three groups; LLLT group, LIPUS group, and control group. After 5 min from the separators' placement, the first dose of the laser or the ultrasound was applied, the second dose was applied after 24 h, and the third dose was applied after 48 h on both maxillary and mandibular first molars. The exposure of laser was for 20 s at each point (maxillary and mandibular first molars), with an 810-nm aluminum-gallium-arsenide (AlGaAs) diode laser on continuous mode. The output power set at 150 mW, the energy density of 4 J/cm2, and a laser spot diameter of 7 mm were applied. Whereas the frequency of ultrasonic toothbrush was 1.6 MHz; and average output intensity was 0.2 W/cm2. The application was for 20 min (5 min on each first molar). The control group received the separators without another intervention. A Visual Analog Scale (VAS 100 mm) was used to assess pain intensity at several time intervals during the first four days after the separators' placement.

RESULTS

A total of 145 patients were assessed. There was a significant difference in pain perception among the three groups after 5 min (P = .002). The maximum pain level was reached after 24 h. However, the laser group and the ultrasound group showed a statistically significant decrease in pain scores compared to the control group at all the assessment time points (P < .001). Whereas there was no difference between the laser group and the ultrasound group in reducing the pain scores (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The LLLT and the LIPUS effectively reduce the separation pain when applied in multiple doses without differences between them.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered with the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS). ( https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID= DRKS00029991). Date of registration: 26/08/2022.

The associations between diode laser (810 nm) therapy and chronic wound healing and pain relief: Light into the chronic wound patient's life

Chronic wounds have become one of the major issues in medicine today, the treatments for which include dressing changes, negative pressure wound therapy, hyperbaric oxygen, light irradiation, surgery and so forth. Nevertheless, the application of diode lasers in chronic wounds has rarely been reported. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate the therapeutic effect of diode laser (810 nm) irradiation on chronic wounds. Eighty-nine patients were enrolled in the study. The control group (41 patients) received traditional dressing change therapy, while the diode laser treatment group (48 patients) were patients received additional treatment with diode laser (810 nm) irradiation for 10 min at each dressing change. Wound healing time was compared between two groups, while the pain relief index was creatively introduced to evaluate the effect of relieving wound pain, which was calculated by the difference in pain scores between the first and last dressing changes divided by the number of treatment days. The wound healing time of the diode laser treatment group was 22.71 ± 8.99 days, which was significantly shorter than that of the control group (37.44 ± 23.42 days). The pain relief index of the diode laser treatment group was 0.081 ± 0.055, which was significantly increased compared with that of the control group (0.057 ± 0.033). Our findings suggest that diode laser irradiation has the potential to promote healing in chronic wounds and relieve wound pain.

Orthodontic pain control following arch wire placement; a comparison between pre-emptive tenoxicam and chewing gum: a randomized clinical trial

Background

Pain during fixed orthodontic treatment can have a detrimental effect on patient treatment compliance. To overcome this, there is a definite need to establish the best pain-relieving methods suitable for orthodontic patients in terms of efficacy and use. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of chewing gum and pre-emptive tenoxicam on pain after initial archwire placement and to evaluate the pain perceptions of orthodontic patients in the two groups while performing various functions at specific time intervals.

Methods

Forty-two patients were selected and randomly divided into two groups: group A (chewing gum) and group B (pre-emptive tenoxicam). Pain perception was documented by patients immediately; at 4 h; at bedtime on the day of archwire placement; the next morning; at 24 h; and at bedtime on the 2nd, 3rd, and 7th day after the initial archwire placement. Pain scores were noted during fitting of the posterior teeth, biting, and chewing using a visual analog scale. The data obtained were subjected to statistical analysis.

Results

Group A showed a significant increase in pain until the next morning while fitting the posterior teeth, biting, and chewing [36.2, 52.0, 33.4, respectively]], followed by a gradual decrease by the 7th day. Group B showed a significant increase in pain at bedtime on biting, with a peak value of 47.5. Pain on chewing, fitting posterior teeth, peaked the morning of the next day (100.0, 45.0). The Freidman test showed a statistically significant difference with a p-value of < 0.01. Higher pain scores were observed while chewing and biting compared with that while fitting the posterior teeth in both groups. The overall comparison of pain control between the two groups was not statistically significant [P > 0.05] between the two groups.

Conclusions

Chewing gum was not inferior to pre-emptive tenoxicam. Thus, chewing gum is a non-pharmacological alternative to analgesics for orthodontic pain control that eliminates the chance of adverse reactions and can be used in the absence of adult observation.

The protocol of low-level laser therapy in orthodontic practice: A scoping review of literature

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been widely investigated as an adjunct technique for orthodontic treatment due to photobiomodulation effect. LLLT appears to be supportive for an orthodontic practice in terms of tooth movement acceleration, pain relief, and root resorption management. The decrease in these adverse effects will enhance the compliance in orthodontic patients, which could positively impact treatment outcomes. However, there seemed to be inconsistency in the impact of LLLT as well as its laser and treatment parameters. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the impact of different irradiation parameters on tooth movement acceleration, pain relief, and root resorption as well as to construct a protocol of LLLT in orthodontic practice. The search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of identified articles. The last search was conducted on October 10, 2021 to identify experiments in humans regarding the application of LLLT as noninvasive treatment in orthodontic practice published between 2010 and 2021. However, they were excluded if they were not clinical research, if they did not report the source of laser, or if they were not relevant to tooth movement, pain perception, and root resorption, or if they were not available in English or in full-text. Following the systematic search and selection process, 60 articles were included in this review. A majority of included articles were published in the past few years. The findings of this review supported the application of LLLT in orthodontic practice with purposes of tooth movement acceleration and pain reduction. The positive impact of LLLT on root resorption had not been clearly evident yet. As this review demonstrated heterogeneity of both laser and treatment parameters, further research should be required to ensure the effectiveness of its specific parameters in orthodontic practice.

Pain Reduction during Rapid Palatal Expansion Due to LED Photobiomodulation Irradiation: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective: The purpose of this research is to assess the analgesic efficiency of Photobiomodulation (PBM) in pain reduction in young patients during rapid maxillary expansion therapy. Materials and Methods: Thirty patients were included and allocated to an experimental group [Rapid Palatal Expansion (RPE) and PBM] and a control group (RPE only) at random. Inclusion criteria were skeletal age from CVS1 to CVS3, examined on the cephalometric lateral teleradiography, with cervical vertebra staging and completed eruption of upper first molar. Exclusion criteria were previous orthodontic treatment, bone disease, disability, or skeletal age from CVS4. Patients referred the pain they felt using a Numerical scale rate (NRS), ranging from 0 to 10, with specific intervals of time: 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and from days 2 to 7. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to evaluate differences in NRS reported values between the two groups. Results: The final sample included 30 patients, 14 males and 16 females, with a mean age of 7.8 ± 1.2 years. The pain that was felt at each time interval and the maximum score of pain were significantly lower in the experimental group (p < 0.05) and decreased faster in the experimental group, with a score test near to 0 after 2/3 days. Conclusions: PBM is efficient in reducing the intensity and the time of pain felt by young patients that undergo rapid maxillary expansion.

Viability of Photobiomodulaton Therapy in Decreasing Orthodontic-Related Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To assess the viability of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) in decreasing orthodontic-related pain after different orthodontic procedures. Methods: A computerized literature search was conducted within the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang, VIP, and CBM databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which used PBMT to relieve pain during orthodontic treatment. Particular inclusion and exclusion criteria were connected to recognize relevant articles. The information was extricated autonomously by two reviewers, and a quality assessment was carried out by utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration "risk of bias" tool. Meta-analysis was conducted with fixed- or random-effects models as suitable. Statistical heterogeneity was also examined. The RevMan 5.4 software was utilized for data analysis. Results: Of 1024 recognized articles, 25 RCT were at long last included. Within the risk-of-bias assessments, 1 study displayed a high risk, 22 an unclear risk, and 2 a low risk. The meta-analysis appeared that in patients treated with photobiomodulation (PBM) versus control there was a distinction in support of PBMT in placement of elastomeric separators, canine retraction, and archwire placement during 1 week. Conclusions: PBMT demonstrated to be effective in advancing a reduction pain after elastomeric separators placement, canine retraction, and archwire placement within 1 week. In the future, more high-quality research with consistency in research design is needed for further evaluation.

The Use of Technology in the Management of Orthodontic Treatment-Related Pain

Orthodontic pain is one of the negatives associated with fixed orthodontic treatment that cannot be avoided. This pain usually comes around the wire placement period and gradually decreases once the endogenous analgesic mechanisms start functioning. Over the years, several treatment modalities have been utilized for relief from orthodontic pain, and these include mechanical, behavior modification, and pharmacological methods. However, in the last decade, there are several newer methods employing the use of technology that have come up and are being used for alleviating pain. From computerized indirect bonding to virtual treatment planning, technology has slowly become a vital part of an orthodontist's repertoire. The digital age is here, and orthodontics must embrace the use of technology to help improve the quality of life of patients.

Efficacy of Photobiomodulation Therapy for Orthodontic Pain Control Following the Placement of Elastomeric Separators: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Introduction: Controlling pain in orthodontic patients has gained special attention. This study assessed the efficacy of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) for pain control following the placement of elastomeric separators. Methods: This split-mouth single-blind randomized clinical trial evaluated 30 orthodontic patients who required posterior elastomeric separators. The two maxillary quadrants were randomized into the laser and control groups. In the laser quadrant, an 808 nm diode laser (400 mW, 15.60 J/cm² , 11 seconds, continuous-wave, contact mode) was irradiated to the cervical third of the maxillary first molar roots 24 hours prior to the placement of separators. The control quadrant received placebo radiation by a light-curing unit. The patients received the second laser cycle right before the placement of separators 24 hours later. The level of self-perceived pain was recorded at 0, 2, 6, 24, and 72 hours and 5 days after the intervention in the laser and control quadrants using a visual analog scale (VAS). Data were analyzed using the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and paired-samples t test. Results: The trend of change in the pain score was similar in both groups. The pain score was significantly lower in the laser group than the control group at all-time points (P <0.05) except at time 0. The pain score increased in the first 6 hours and reached its maximum level in 24 hours in both groups. Conclusion: PBMT by an 808 nm diode laser can effectively decrease pain following the placement of elastomeric separators.

Use of Lasers and Piezoelectric in Intraoral Surgery

Laser therapy has been delivering good results for more than 30 years. Therapeutic effects are seen due to its ability to stimulate cell proliferation, revascularization, cell regeneration, local microcirculation, and vascular permeability; leading to edema reduction and analgesic effects. The piezoelectric system has been used in several surgeries recently, following the trend of minimally invasive surgery. The system consists of crystals undergoing deformation when exposed to electric current, resulting in an oscillating movement with ultrasound frequency. In oral surgery it is used in orthognathic and temporomandibular joint procedures, alveolar corticotomies, tumor excision, bone grafts, third molars, and dental implants.

Effects of ibuprofen and low-level laser therapy on orthodontic pain by means of the analysis of interleukin 1-beta and substance P levels in the gingival crevicular fluid

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare the effects of ibuprofen and low-level laser therapy in alleviating orthodontic pain observed after elastomeric separator placement (ESP) by means of the analysis of interleukin 1‑beta (IL-1β) and substance P (SP) levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) and visual analog scale (VAS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 60 subjects requiring ESP for the banding of maxillary first molars were randomly assigned to the ibuprofen, laser, and control groups. The ibuprofen and control groups received, respectively, 400 mg ibuprofen and placebo lactose tablets orally 1 h before ESP; the laser group received a single low-level laser irradiation session immediately after ESP. GCF samples were collected immediately after ESP (day 0) and on days 1, 3, and 7. Pain intensity was evaluated using the VAS immediately after ESP (baseline) and at hours 2 and 6, as well as on days 1, 3, and 7.

RESULTS

Although IL-1β levels increased significantly on days 1, 3, and 7 compared to day 0, intergroup comparison results revealed insignificant differences. SP levels indicated insignificant within-group differences. Only the SP levels of the ibuprofen group showed a significant decrease on days 0 and 1 compared to the laser and control groups. In all groups, VAS scores increased from baseline to a peak level on day 1, followed by a significant decrease on days 3 and 7. Intergroup comparison results of VAS scores indicated less pain intensity in the ibuprofen group compared to the control group at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Only the ibuprofen group exhibited significant decreases in SP levels on days 0 and 1, as well as in VAS scores at baseline.

A systematic review of the effective laser wavelength range in delivering photobiomodulation for pain relief in active orthodontic treatment

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to establish an effective wavelength range for PhotoBioModulation (PBM) to relieve pain in orthodontic treatments.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The electronic literature search was carried out in the following databases: PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane. In the initial search, 255 papers were obtained. Deleting duplicates in the search left 180 items. One manually searched study was included for a total of 181 studies. According to PRISMA guidelines and a thorough analysis of their methodology, the final sample was composed of 13 RCTs. The final statistical analysis was performed in 11 studies. The statistical analysis sought to strengthen the collected data, determining the correlation coefficient (r) for the same time interval (24h) using a scale equivalent to the standard value (0-10cm). Aiming to reduce the effect of heterogeneity, the difference in cm between control group (GC) and experimental group (EG) averages was considered the outcome. This difference was correlated with the wavelength in nm, calculating the Pearson linear correlation coefficient, and calculating a logarithmic correlation.

RESULTS

The dispersion of the data obtained in the experimental groups at each given wavelength showed that the most significant number of studies were in the ranges of 780-830nm. The correlation between the wavelength and the difference between the control and experimental group averages, either linear (R2=0.0564, r=0.237) or logarithmic (R2=0.0688, r=0.262) was not significant (P>0.90). Therefore, pain reduction after 24h is not significantly dependent of wavelength.

CONCLUSION

The majority of RCTs related to pain relief in orthodontic treatment showed 780-830nm as the most effective photobiomodulation wavelength range for orthodontic pain relief. However, pain reduction after 24h is not significantly dependent of wavelength. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019119799).

Low-level laser therapy effectiveness in reducing initial orthodontic archwire placement pain in premolars extraction cases: a single-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial

Background

The objective of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) effectiveness in spontaneous and chewing pain reduction following initial orthodontic archwire placement.

Methods

26 patients (mean age 20.07 ± 3.13 years) with maxillary Little’s Irregularity Index (LII) of 7 mm or more that indicates first maxillary premolars extraction and no medications intake were eligible for this trial. Patients were randomly assigned with 1:1 ratio using simple randomization technique to receive either LLL or placebo treatment. Blinding was applicable for patients only. In the laser group, patients received a single LLL dose (wavelength 830 nm, energy 2 J/point) in four points (2 buccal, 2 palatal) for each maxillary anterior tooth root. Patients in the placebo group had the same laser application procedure without emitting the laser beam. Patients were asked to score spontaneous and chewing pain intensity by filling out a questionnaire with a 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) after 1, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h of treatment application. Independent t-test was used to compare the mean pain scores between the laser and placebo groups for both spontaneous and chewing pain at each studied time point.

Results

No dropout occurred so the results of the 26 patients were statistically analyzed. Despite some clinical differences observed between the two groups, no statistical significance was found for each studied time point (p > 0.05) for both spontaneous and chewing pain except after 72 h for chewing pain with a VAS score of (18.84 ± 13.44) mm for the laser group compared to (38.15 ± 27.06) mm for the placebo group.

Conclusions

LLLT, with the suggested parameters, is not effective in pain reduction following initial orthodontic archwire placement.

Trial registration

Name of the registry:Clinicaltrials.gov

Trial registration number:NCT02568436.

Date of registration: 26 September 2015 ‘Retrospectively registered’.

Current Concepts of Laser-Oral Tissue Interaction

Fundamental to the adjunctive use of laser photonic energy for delivering therapy and tissue management, is the ability of the incident energy to be absorbed by target tissues. The aim of this review is to examine the differential performance of the separate components of oral hard and soft tissues when exposed to laser photonic irradiance of variable wavelengths and power values. Through an examination of peer-reviewed published data and materials, the interaction of laser photonic energy and target tissues are explored in detail. Varying laser wavelength emissions relative to anatomical structures explores the ability to optimise laser–tissue interactions, and also identifies possible risk scenarios as they apply to adjacent non-target structures. The concepts and practical aspects of laser photonic energy interactions with target oral tissues are clearly demonstrated. Emphasis was placed on optimising the minimum level of laser power delivery in order to achieve a desired tissue effect, whilst minimising the risk or outcome of collateral tissue damage.

Influence of photobiomodulation on pain perception during initial orthodontic tooth movement

Abstract Introduction Laser in low intensity (LLI) has been used to reduce the discomfort and pain that is triggered by the forces applied during orthodontic treatment. Objective To evaluate the effect of LLI application in the pain perception of periodontal ligament initial compression, during orthodontic tooth movement; and to compare the effect of this therapy between men and women. Material and method The sample consisted of 30 volunteers, who needed orthodontic band placement on mandibular first molars. After insertion of the elastic separators, LLI was applied to the mesial and distal apical region (wavelength 808nm, energy 2J, time 20s and fluency of 8.32J/cm2) and at three points on the root region (wavelength 808nm, energy 1J, time 10s and fluency of 4.16J/cm2) of the first molar (irradiated side) and compared to the contralateral first molar (non-irradiated side), in three time intervals: 0hs, 24hs and 48hs. Pain perception was evaluated by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), at 0hs, 24hs and 48hs after insertion, with significance of 5%. Result The pain level was observed to be significantly lower (p<0.05) on the irradiated side, irrespective of gender and time. Women presented a significantly higher pain level (p<0.05) than men, irrespective of time and side. There were no significant differences between the time intervals (p>0.05). Conclusion It was concluded that LLI reduced the perception of initial pain in patients in whom compression of the periodontal ligament was promoted by elastic separation, and that women had a greater perception of pain sensitivity in the time intervals studied.

Effect of ozone and diode laser (635 nm) in reducing orthodontic pain in the maxillary arch—a randomized clinical controlled trial

The effect of ozone, diode laser irradiation, and presence of teeth crowding/spacing on pain perception in orthodontic patient was tested. Overall, 76 patients [55 women and 21 men; age 35.1(6.4) years] who met the inclusion criteria participated in the study. Immediately after fixed orthodontic appliance placement, the patients were exposed to a pain relief treatment (one single session) using either 635-nm diode laser (SmartM, Lasotronix, Warsaw, Poland) or ozone therapy (OzoneDTA, Apoza, New Taipei City, Taiwan) by placing the handpieces in the area of each teeth apex and interdental papillae, from the maxillary right first molar to the maxillary left first molar. Subjects were divided into three groups: control group (G1, n = 26), ozone (G2, n = 26, exposed to ozone therapy, generator probe type 3, working time per point 5 s, 23 points, application time 1 min and 55 s), and laser group (G3, n = 25, exposed to continuous mode diode laser, 400 mW, handpiece diameter 8 mm, spot area 0.5024 cm2, power density per second 1.59 W/cm2, dose 2 J per point, time: 5 s per point, 23 points, total energy per session 46 J, application time 1 min and 55 s). The level of teeth crowding was assessed using the Lundstrom indicator. The patients received a questionnaire for pain assessment (the Numeric Rating Scale, NRS-11, grade level 0–10) and recorded at 7 time points (1 h, 6 h, and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 days ) after the fixed orthodontic appliance placement. The mean pain values for the diode laser, ozone, and control group were 3.6 (1.31) (95% CI, 2.95–4.25), 5.25 (3.37) (95% CI, 3.52–6.98), and 5.75 (2.40) (95% CI, 4.69–6.81), respectively. We observed lower pain values in the diode laser group compared to the control group (p = 0.0237). The use of ozone in this study did not result in significant pain reduction in comparison to control (p = 0.8040) and laser groups (p = 0.1029). There were no differences in pain perception between patients with crowded teeth and non-crowded teeth in each group (G1, p = 0.66, G2, p = 0.86, G3, p = 0.24). The use of 635-nm diode laser led to decreased pain perception; however, ozone and presence of teeth crowding/spacing did not affect the pain perception in orthodontic patients during the first 5 days after the fixed orthodontic appliance placement.

Laser-Assisted Orthodontic Tooth Movement in Saudi Population: A Prospective Clinical Intervention of Low-Level Laser Therapy in the 1st Week of Pain Perception in Four Treatment Modalities

Background

This first-in-human study in Saudi orthodontic patients has evaluated the role of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in pain perception (PP). The outcome of single application of LLLT with 4 different treatment modalities (TM) on PP are evaluated following orthodontic bracket bonding on maxilla.

Materials and Methods

A prospective clinical intervention with implementation of parallel technique in each group, 32 orthodontic patients with ectopic canine requiring fixed orthodontic appliance were enrolled and randomly allocated to the 4 groups: LLLT + self-ligating (SL) bracket, LLLT + conventional (Conv.) bracket, non-LLLT + SL bracket, and non-LLLT + Conv. bracket. Orthodontic bracket bonding from 1st molar to 1st molar and superelastic 0.012 inch NiTi were applied for the maxilla. For each patient, maxillary 1st molar to molar received a single application of LLLT using a 940 nm Ga-Al-As laser device on 5 different points labially/buccally and palatally. Main outcome measure was the degree of PP score during the 1st week of orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) after 4 hours, 24 hours, 3 days, and 7 days of both LLLT and non-LLLT treatment applications. A questionnaire with an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) was used for PP.

Results

Mean ± SD of PP in the LLLT + SL group was 3.33 ± 1.4, 3.58 ± 1.06, 2.31 ± 0.67, and 1.89 ± 0.54 in 4 hours, 24 hours, 3 days, and 7 days, respectively. Compared to all 4 TM groups, LLLT groups showed better PP. More statistically significant differences were found in LLLT groups. No harms were encountered.

Limitations

The intervention provider and the patient were not blinded to the intervention.

Conclusion

The LLLT + SL group revealed significantly promising benefits on PP during OTM.

Photobiomodulation in acceleration of orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

Photobiomodulation therapy, a non invasive method with no adverse effects, has been used to accelerate tooth movement in orthodontia. However, the specific characteristics of laser settings used in studies documented have reported varied inconsistent conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

We decided to undertake a systematic review to eliminate this inconsistency by quantifying the literature studies that indicated the link between photobiomodulation and acceleration of tooth movement and to assess if there is any association of photobiomodulation therapy in accelerating tooth movement.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We systematically searched for articles of existing literatures on Photobiomodulation therapy and acceleration of tooth movement over Cochrane library, Pubmed central, EMBASE, Scopus and Web of sciences from 2000 to 2017. Mesh search terms using various descriptors were used to identify the studies.

SEARCH CRITERIA

We included randomized control trial and clinical control trail studies that used Ga-Al-As diode laser and Oseeopulse laser with specific characteristics and company specifications, addressing relevant efficiency and safety outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eligible studies were reviewed and data was extracted on a standard from. We used Cochrane review manager software (Revman version 5.3) to assess the qualities of each included trials. Data were analyzed using an inverse variance method with random effects model effect.

RESULTS

We observed a statistical significant difference between the photobiomodulation therapy compared to non laser group in the acceleration of tooth movement (Mean difference 0.59 (95%CI- 0.24 to 0.95) I² 95%). However, these results need caution while generalizing in clinical practice due to the large amount of heterogeneity across the studies.

CONCLUSION

Findings of the current systematic review suggest a possible benefit with photobiomodulation therapy and tooth movement in orthodontia. However these findings need to be further validated in larger trials using specific standardized characteristics of laser settings to uniform the methodological design that can be used in routine clinical practice.

Systematic Review of Delivery Parameters Used in Dental Photobiomodulation Therapy

Objective: This systematic review of published data critically appraises the consistency in the reported delivery parameters used in photobiomodulation (PBM) therapies research within clinical dentistry and makes reporting recommendations for future clinical protocols. Background: Key to the standardization of randomized clinical trials and associated peer-reviewed articles is the disclosure of all laser and light-emitting diode operating parameters. The current status shows a lack of full parameters and significantly impacts on the ability to integrate published data with current and future investigation into clinical PBM therapy. Materials and methods: Search engines, PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane, were scanned for investigation into the effects of PBM therapy research within clinical dentistry. Key words "Low-Level-Laser," "PBM," "Photobiomodulation," "Oral" and "Therapy" were used and a total of 754 articles identified, spanning a period of 9 years and 1 month between February 2009 and March 2018. Only human clinical trials were considered. Fifty-two articles were included in this investigation and the reported basic delivery parameters used in PBM therapies research were considered for each clinical trial. Results: The overall reported basic delivery parameters used in PBM therapies research were too inadequate to be able to be replicated in further studies. These included parameters related to the power meter, beam cross-sectional dynamics, fluence, and wider aspects of dosimetry. Conclusions: The delivery parameters used in PBM therapy research within clinical dentistry, investigated in this study, presented a wide variation in their recording or nonrecording of all significant elements needed to have scientific validity. A constant inconsistency in delivering valid, reliable, PBM therapy doses, to target tissues was also identified. The lack of consensus in delivering a sound protocol for PBM therapy, is partly due to the lack of adequate reported materials and methods, which are essential for replication of individual studies. One way to resolve this problem is for Journals to insist on all comprehensive parameter records, used in PBM therapies, to be part of author guidelines in submitting articles of studies on PBM therapy in clinical dentistry.

Evaluation of the use of photobiomodulation following the placement of elastomeric separators: Protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Pain stemming from the placement of elastomeric separators and the exchanging of wires and accessories is the greatest reason for abandoning orthodontic treatment. Indeed, discomfort related to treatment exerts a negative impact on quality of life due to the difficulty chewing and biting. This paper proposes a study to evaluate the analgesic effects of photomiobodulation (PBM) on individuals undergoing orthodontic treatment.

METHODS

The sample will be composed of 72 individuals who receiving elastomeric separators on the mesial and distal faces of the maxillary first molars. The patients will be randomly allocated to 2 groups: an experimental group irradiated with low-level laser and a sham group submitted to simulated laser irradiation. Upon the placement of the separators, the experimental group will receive a single application of PBM on the mesial and distal cervical portion and apical third of the molars. Perceived pain will be analyzed after one hour using the visual analog scale in both groups. Samples will be taken of the gingival crevice with absorbent paper for 30 seconds for the analysis of cytokines using ELISA and the results of the 2 groups will be compared. The patients will sign a statement of informed consent. Statistical analysis will be performed with the Student's t test and analysis of variance (ANOVA).

DISCUSSION

The expectation is that the patients in the irradiated group will have a lower perception of pain and lower quantity of cytokines compared to those in the sham group. The purpose of the study is to establish an effective method for PBM with the use of low-level infrared laser (Ga-Al-As with a wavelength of 808 nm and output power of 100 mW) for reductions in pain and inflammatory cytokines related to orthodontic treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol was registered in ClinicalTrial.gov, under number NCT03939988. It was first posted and last updated in May 6, 2019.

Infrared Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Effects on Orthodontic Tooth Movement

The present study aimed to analyze the effect of LED phototherapy on the presence of hyalinization and root resorption during orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) in rats and to measure the amount of tooth movement. Eighty rats were allocated into two groups: LED and control (CON), where the LED rats were irradiated with infrared LED (850 nm, 30 mW) for 5 min during the first five days of OTM and where controls were not irradiated. Both groups were subdivided into four subgroups (n=10) according to the date of euthanasia (4, 7, 14 and 21 days). Five out of ten LED21 and five of ten CON21 rats were submitted to micro-computed tomography (μCT); μCT scans were taken on days 0, 7, 14 and 21. For histological study, maxillae were processed to light microscopy using Hematoxylin-Eosin (HE) and Tartrate-Resistant Acid Phosphatase (TRAP) histochemistry. The amount of tooth movement did not differ between LED and CON. Hyalinization was observed at the pressure areas in both groups, and it did not show a statistically significant difference between the groups. Root resorption was also observed in both groups after 7 days and it did not represent any differences between the two groups. LED phototherapy was not able to increase the amount of OTM. Similar characteristics of hyalinization and root resorption were observed in both groups.

Indicações e tratamentos da laserterapia de baixa intensidade na odontologia: uma revisão sistemática da literatura

Introdução: O laser de baixa intensidade (LLLT – Low Level Laser Therapy) possui efeitos anti-inflamatórios, analgésicos e trófico tecidual, podendo ser aplicado em uma grande variedade de condições clínicas na odontologia. Objetivo: este estudo teve como objetivo revisar as indicações e as possibilidades de tratamento de LLLT nas diversas especialidades odontológicas. Métodos Como estratégia de busca fez-se uma pesquisa bibliográfica nas bases de dados eletrônicas MEDLINE, BSV e SCIELO para identificar estudos relevantes de 2016 a 2018. Uma combinação das seguintes palavras-chaves forai utilizada: low level laser therapy e dentistry. Estas foram combinadas através do operador boleano “AND”. Resultados: foram encontrados 37 artigos com indicação de tratamento com laser de baixa intensidade na periodontia, ortodontia, cirurgia, odontopediatria, DTM, patologia, endodontia e dentística. Conclusão: LLLT é um tratamento seguro, sem efeitos colaterais que pode ser utilizado nas especialidades odontológicas como eficaz tratamento coadjuvante aos convencionais.

Effectiveness of different psychological interventions in reducing fixed orthodontic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background/Objective

Pain induced by tooth movement is a common experience for orthodontic patients. The effectiveness of psychological intervention, as a new approach to control pain, has not been fully explored. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis is intended to evaluate the analgesic effect of psychological intervention within the week after fixed orthodontic initial arch wire placement.

Methods

A computerised literature search was conducted in the Medline (1966-2019), Embase (1984-2019), Cochrane Library (Issue 1 of 2019), CBMdisk (1978-2019) and CNKI (1994-2019) databases to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs), which used psychological interventions to relieve pain during fixed orthodontic treatment. Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to identify relevant articles. The data were extracted independently by two reviewers and a quality assessment was carried out by using the Cochrane Collaboration ‘risk of bias’ tool. Meta-analyses were conducted with fixed or random effects models as appropriate. Statistical heterogeneity was also examined. The RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis.

Results

A total of 472 articles were identified, from which nine RCTs were finally included. A meta-analysis revealed that after initial arch wire placement, cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and music therapy could significantly reduce pain within three days compared with a control group. In addition, there were no differences in pain reduction between CBT and music therapy within one week. Furthermore, a structured phone and text follow-up could significantly reduce and control pain and had the same effectiveness in pain reduction.

Conclusions

In the short term after initial arch wire placement, all psychological interventions could significantly reduce the intensity of pain without adverse effects. In the current study, there was no significant difference in pain relief between the different psychological interventions. In the future, more high-quality research with consistency in research design is needed for further evaluation.

Evaluating low-level laser therapy effect on reducing orthodontic pain using two laser energy values: a split-mouth randomized placebo-controlled trial

Background

No randomized controlled trial before has evaluated the role of low-level laser energy in its analgesic effects in orthodontics.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of single application of low-level laser with 4-Joule or 16-Joule energy on pain reduction following elastomeric separators placement.

Trial design

A two-arm parallel-group single-blind placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial, with implementation of split-mouth technique in each group.

Materials and methods

Twenty-six patients in need of orthodontic treatment with a fixed orthodontic appliance were enrolled and randomly allocated to either the 4-Joule or the 16-Joule laser energy group. Elastomeric separators were applied for the mandibular first molars. For each patient one molar received a single low-level laser dose using an 830-nm Ga-Al-As laser device with either 4-Joule or 16-Joule laser beam energy, while the other molar received a placebo treatment by applying the laser device in the same method and parameters as the counterpart molar without emitting the laser beam. The molar to be irradiated was also randomly chosen using simple randomization technique. Allocation was concealed and patients were blinded to which side would receive the laser irradiation. Main outcome measure was the degree of pain scored during mastication for each mandibular first molar after 1, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours of both laser and placebo treatments application. A questionnaire with an 100-mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used for pain assessment.

Results

Thirty-six patients were evaluated for eligibility, 10 of them were excluded making the final randomized number 26 patients. One patient dropped out later for not completing the questionnaire. Accordingly, the results of 25 patients were statistically analysed. No statistical significance was found for both low-level laser energy values in comparison to the corresponding placebo treatments. No harms were encountered.

Limitations

Intervention provider was not blinded to the intervention.

Conclusion

Low-level laser therapy, applied at two different laser energy values, is ineffective in relieving elastomeric separators induced orthodontic pain.

Trial registration

This trial was not registered.

Funding

No funding to be declared.

Effect of photobiomodulation with low-level laser therapy combined with potassium nitrate on controlling post-bleaching tooth sensitivity: clinical, randomized, controlled, double-blind, and split-mouth study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of photobiomodulation with low-level laser therapy (PBM-LLLT) combined with 5% potassium nitrate (KNO₃) on controlling tooth sensitivity (TS) after in-office tooth bleaching.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty volunteers were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were randomly allocated into four groups: G1 (control): placebo gel application, 35% hydrogen peroxide bleaching (HP35) and mock PBM-LLLT without light emission; G2: placebo gel application, bleaching with HP35 and PBM-LLLT; G3: application of KNO₃, bleaching with HP35 and mock PBM-LLLT; and G4: application of KNO₃, bleaching with HP35 and PBM-LLLT. A pain assessment questionnaire was used to evaluate TS during the 21 days of treatment. The Friedman test was used for intragroup analysis, and the Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney tests were used for intergroup comparisons.

RESULTS

The intragroup evaluation showed significant differences among the evaluation times in all groups (p ≤ 0.05). The highest pain sensitivity levels were recorded on the 1st, 8th, and 15th days. In G1, TS manifested for up to 3 days after each bleaching session, while G2, G3, and G4 presented TS only on the days of the bleaching sessions. Intergroup analysis showed that TS manifestation differed significantly between G1 and the other groups (p ≤ 0.05) but did not differ significantly among G2, G3, and G4 (p ≥ 0.05).

CONCLUSION

PBM-LLLT and KNO₃ are effective at reducing pain sensitivity after tooth bleaching, but no synergistic effect between these treatments was observed for the different evaluation periods.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The effect of PBM-LLLT combined with KNO₃ on post-bleaching tooth sensitivity is similar to their individual use alone.

Comparison of two analgesics used for pain relief after placement of orthodontic separators

Objective

The purpose of this study was to assess the possible effect of two analgesics: paracetamol (500 mg) and ibuprofen (400 mg) on pain and routine life of the patients after placement of orthodontic separators.

Methodology

Ninety patients aged 11–41 years undergoing fixed comprehensive orthodontic treatment requiring placement of different orthodontic separators participated in the study. Following placement of separators, the participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: paracetamol (500 mg) given every 6 h for 3 days, ibuprofen (400 mg) given every 8 h for 2 days and control group in which no analgesic was given. A questionnaire comprising of 7 questions was distributed to the participants and were asked to report their feeling of pain. The collected data were tabulated and the statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA, chi-square test, and t-test with a significance level of p < 0.05.

Results

In general, the level of pain was high for all groups in the first three days. Then it was gradually reduced until the 7th day of the study. Few patients reported feeling of pain during their sleep whereas a significant reduction of the pain was reported during eating and chewing after the 3rd day of separators. However, some participants felt continuous pain on the 1st and 2nd days and it was reduced gradually on the 3rd day until the 7th day following application of separators.

Conclusion

The patients prescribed ibuprofen did not report any problem with tooth movement along with significant reduction in pain as compared to paracetamol. Pain relief medication after placement of separators should be taken only if patient feels intolerable pain but not as routine practice.

Effect of low-level laser therapy combined with 5000 parts per million fluoride dentifrice on postbleaching sensitivity: A clinical, randomized, and double-blind study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this double-blind, randomized, controlled clinical study was to assess the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) combined with 5000 ppm fluoride dentifrice on postbleaching sensitivity in teeth exposed to 35% hydrogen peroxide for four weeks.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five volunteers were evaluated using the split-mouth model in which the right and left maxillary/mandibular quadrants were randomized and allocated to one of two groups: GPLACEBO, in which the laser tip was positioned without the emission of light (placebo effect) + 5000 ppm sodium fluoride, or GLASER, which comprised LLLT + 5000 ppm sodium fluoride. For both groups, LLLT and placebo were used before bleaching, whereas fluoride was applied after bleaching. LLLT was applied at two points: on the central cervical and medial regions of the incisors, canines, and premolars in the corresponding hemi-arch. At each point, 60 J/cm² was applied for 16 seconds with an irradiance of 3.75 W/cm² using the therapeutic infrared device. To assess tooth sensitivity, a modified visual analogue scale was used after an evaporative stimulus, and a daily pain questionnaire was also applied.

RESULTS

The Wilcoxon and Friedman tests demonstrated a significant difference in the incidence of sensitivity pain between GPLACEBO and GLASER (P ≤ .05), with different evaluation times.

CONCLUSION

Teeth treated with laser therapy in combination with the topical use of sodium fluoride at each bleaching session demonstrated less sensitivity compared with the application of sodium fluoride only.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

The use of a low-level laser therapy in combination with topical use of sodium fluoride improves symptoms of dentin sensitivity at each bleaching session.

Influence of Photobiomodulation Therapy on Gingivitis Induced by Multi-Bracket Appliances: A Split-Mouth Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this split-mouth trial was to investigate the influence of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) on adjuvant treatment of gingivitis induced by multi-bracket appliances, after bracket debonding and professional tooth cleaning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirteen patients (mean age 16.15 years; standard deviation ±2.12 years) who had completed active orthodontic treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances in an orthodontic clinic were included on a randomized basis. At time point T0, after bracket debonding and professional tooth cleaning, the papilla bleeding index (PBI) and bleeding on probing (BOP) were assessed in the upper jaw by the blinded investigator (M.S.), who was not aware at any time of which quadrant received PBMT. The study was based on a patient-blinded split-mouth design. In each patient, PBMT was administered by a practitioner (S.S.) in one upper quadrant (wavelength: 660 nm; Power: 100 mW; Power density: 100 mW/cm²; Energy density per application point = 2 J/cm²; Energy per application point = 2 J; Total dose = 52 J/cm²; Total energy = 52 J; Irradiation time: 26 × 20 sec), while the other upper quadrant received a simulated laser application with the laser system turned off. Randomized equal allocation of the sides was accomplished. The second PBI and BOP assessment followed 4-6 days after laser irradiation (T1) by M.S.

RESULTS

No statistical differences were observed between the sides with regard to PBI and BOP values at T0 (p > 0.05). The PBI and BOP values decreased significantly between T0 and T1 on both sides (p < 0.05). At T1, the PBI and BOP values were significantly lower in the laser side in comparison with the control side (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of these results and study parameters, adjuvant PBMT is able to accelerate the healing process in patients with gingivitis induced by multi-bracket appliances.

Optimal management of orthodontic pain

Pain is an undesirable side effect of orthodontic tooth movement, which causes many patients to give up orthodontic treatment or avoid it altogether. The aim of this study was to investigate, through an analysis of the scientific literature, the best method for managing orthodontic pain. The methodological aspects involved careful definition of keywords and diligent search in databases of scientific articles published in the English language, without any restriction of publication date. We recovered 1281 articles. After the filtering and classification of these articles, 56 randomized clinical trials were selected. Of these, 19 evaluated the effects of different types of drugs for the control of orthodontic pain, 16 evaluated the effects of low-level laser therapy on orthodontic pain, and 21 evaluated other methods of pain control. Drugs reported as effective in orthodontic pain control included ibuprofen, paracetamol, naproxen sodium, aspirin, etoricoxib, meloxicam, piroxicam, and tenoxicam. Most studies report favorable outcomes in terms of alleviation of orthodontic pain with the use of low-level laser therapy. Nevertheless, we noticed that there is no consensus, both for the drug and for laser therapy, on the doses and clinical protocols most appropriate for orthodontic pain management. Alternative methods for orthodontic pain control can also broaden the clinician's range of options in the search for better patient care.

Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy in Reducing Orthodontic Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

To assess the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in reducing orthodontic pain after the application of orthodontic force (OF).

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EBSCOhost databases. The study included randomized clinical trials (RCT) which analysed the effectiveness of LLLT in reducing orthodontic pain assessed at 24 and 72 hrs after the application of OF. The risk of bias of the eligible trials was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Standard mean difference was calculated and pooled by meta-analysis using random effect models.

Results

Of 467 identified articles, 20 RCT were finally included. In the risk of bias assessments, 13 studies presented a high risk, 5 an unclear risk, and 2 a low risk. The meta-analysis showed that in patients treated with laser versus placebo there was a difference in favour of LLLT in spontaneous pain 24 and 72 hrs after the installation of light archwires and spontaneous pain and chewing pain 24 and 72 hrs after the installation of elastomeric separators.

Conclusions

LLLT proved to be effective in promoting a reduction in spontaneous and chewing pain after the application of OF; however, the poor quality of the evidence requires these results to be treated with caution.

Evaluation of Low Level Laser Therapy on Pain Perception Following Orthodontic Elastomeric Separation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Periodontal pain caused by elastomeric separators is a very common problem in the commencement of orthodontic treatment. Previous studies have shown good results in reducing this pain by Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) and different protocols of application have been suggested in the literature.

AIM

This trial aimed to evaluate LLLT on managing orthodontic pain caused by elastomeric separators and to compare single versus double irradiation in possible pain reduction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A clinical randomized compound (parallel-group and split-mouth design) trial was conducted on 36 patients between 12 and 26 years of age. Elastomeric separators were placed at the mesial and distal surfaces of the first molars in one jaw (upper or lower) for each patient and in only one side of the mouth (the other side served as the placebo side). The trial had two groups: the first group received single irradiation of LLLT [Gallium Aluminum Arsenide (GaAlAs): 830 nm, 4J/cm², 100mW] immediately after separators insertion, where as the second group received double irradiation immediately after separators insertion and after 24hours. All patients were instructed to rate the level of pain at 1, 6, 24, 48, 96 hours on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). The student 't' tests, repeated measures ANOVA and LSD post-hoc tests were employed.

RESULTS

LLLT was successful in reducing post-separation pain when the experimental side was compared to the placebo side at all assessment times in each group (p<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between single and double irradiation groups in terms of pain reduction (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

GaAlAs LLLT application reduced early orthodontic pain caused by elastomeric separators by single or double irradiation.

Supplemental vibrational force does not reduce pain experience during initial alignment with fixed orthodontic appliances: a multicenter randomized clinical trial

This prospective randomized trial investigated the effect of supplemental vibrational force on orthodontic pain during alignment with fixed-appliances. Eighty-one subjects < 20 years-old undergoing extraction-based fixed-appliance treatment were randomly allocated to supplementary (20-minutes/day) use of an intra-oral vibrational device (AcceleDent^®) (n = 29); an identical non-functional (sham) device (n = 25) or fixed-appliances only (n = 27). Each subject recorded pain intensity (using a 100-mm visual-analogue scale) and intake of oral analgesia in a questionnaire, following appliance-placement (T1) and first-adjustment (T2) for 1-week (immediately-after, 4, 24, 72-hours and at 1-week). Mean maximum-pain for the total sample was 72.96 mm [SD 21.59; 95%CI 68.19–77.74 mm] with no significant differences among groups (P = 0.282). Subjects taking analgesics reported slightly higher maximum-pain although this was not significant (P = 0.170). The effect of intervention was independent of analgesia (P = 0.883). At T1 and T2, a statistically and clinically significant increase in mean pain was seen at 4 and 24-hours, declining at 72-hours and becoming insignificant at 1-week. For mean alignment-rate, pain-intensity and use of analgesics, no significant differences existed between groups (P > 0.003). The only significant predictor for mean pain was time. Use of an AcceleDent vibrational device had no significant effect on orthodontic pain or analgesia consumption during initial alignment with fixed appliances.