↓ Skip to main content

Effects of rapid maxillary expansion in cleft patients resulting from the use of two different expanders

Overview of attention for article published in Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of rapid maxillary expansion in cleft patients resulting from the use of two different expanders
Published in
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, September 2016
DOI 10.1590/2177-6709.2016-001.aop
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Santos Fonseca Figueiredo, Lucas Cardinal, Flávia Uchôa Costa Bartolomeo, Juan Martin Palomo, Martinho Campolina Rebello Horta, Ildeu Andrade, Dauro Douglas Oliveira

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the skeletal and dental effects of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in cleft patients using two types of expanders. Twenty unilateral cleft lip and palate patients were randomly divided into two groups, according to the type of expander used: (I) modified Hyrax and (II) inverted Mini-Hyrax. A pretreatment cone-beam computed tomographic image (T0) was taken as part of the initial orthodontic records and three months after RME as need for bone graft planning (T1). In general, there was no significant difference among groups (p > 0.05). Both showed significant transverse maxillary expansion (p < 0.05) and non-significant forward and/or downward movement of the maxilla (p > 0.05). There was greater crown than apical expansion. Maxillary posterior expansion tended to be larger than anterior opening (p < 0.05). Cleft and non-cleft sides were symmetrically expanded and there was no difference in dental tipping between both sides (p > 0.05). The appliances tested are effective for transverse expansion of the maxilla. However, these appliances should be better indicated to cleft cases also presenting posterior transverse discrepancy, since there was greater expansion in the posterior maxillary region than in the anterior one.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 30 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 53%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Unspecified 1 1%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 1 1%
Unknown 32 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#330
of 459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,187
of 328,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 459 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,658 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them