Success rate, treatment duration, and pain perception in the management of palatally impacted canines using the K9 and Ballista spring: a randomized clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the success rate, treatment duration, and pain perceived during forced eruption of maxillary palatally impacted canines using the K9 and Ballista springs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty unilateral palatal canine impactions of moderate and difficult category as determined by KPG index (score between 10 and 19) were enrolled. Group 1 comprised canine impactions managed with K9 springs, and Group 2 comprised Ballista springs. Block randomization and opaque sealed envelopes were used for allocation. The success rate and treatment duration (application of force to ligation of the impacted canine into the initial alignment archwire) were recorded. Pain perception was evaluated on a 10-point visual analogue scale (VAS) and modified McGill Pain Questionnaire. Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U-test were used to compare the groups. RESULTS: The success rate for eruption of palatally impacted canines was 100%. The average treatment duration was 296.13 ± 96.45 days and 311.93 ± 94.34 days, respectively for Group 1 and Group 2. VAS scale scores for pain were greater for Group 2 compared to Group1, and the differences were statistically significant at all time intervals except at T1. The frequency of none and mild pain was significantly greater at all time intervals in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The impacted canines of moderate and difficult category were erupted with a 100% success rate and similar treatment duration with both interventions. The pain scores of Ballista springs were greater after 24 hours of force application.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".