Postretention phase: Patients' compliance and reasons for noncompliance with removable retainers

Abstract

Background: Retention is considered as an important phase at the end of any active orthodontic tooth movement. Aims: The purposes of this study were to compare compliance between Hawley retainer (HR) and vacuum formed retainers (VFRs) and to detect the reasons for noncompliance. Materials and Methods: Questionnaires were distributed to those who had an orthodontic treatment and currently have experience with the orthodontic retainer. Items included demographic information and questions pertaining to treatment satisfaction, perceived responsibility for retention, type of retainer prescribed, Likert scale to detect the reasons for discontinuing use of retainers, and relapse. Chi-square and t-test were used to compare the data. Results: Out of the 150 questionnaires distributed, 98 returned and seven were excluded from the study. The compliant groups were 40, whereas the noncompliant group were 51. Sixty-four (70.3%) of the participants were using HR, whereas 27 (29.7%) were using VFRs retainer. Seventeen percent (Hawley) and 15% (VFRs) of the participants who did not comply reported that they had lost their retainer. For both retainers, those participants who did not comply, the majority agreed that they do not wear their retainer because it affects their eating (84.3%), speech (56.9%), comfort (47.1%), and breath odour (43.1%). A statistically significant difference in compliance levels in relation to the length of time since debond was also found (P Conclusions: The participants were more compliant with Hawley's than VFRs retainers and a significant difference in compliance levels in relation to the length of time since debond was found.