Introduction: Orthodontic treatment is often perceived as time-consuming by patients. Various techniques have been developed to accelerate treatment and reduce its duration, but there is limited literature supporting their efficacy and advantages. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and acceptability of two methods in accelerating orthodontic tooth movement, providing valuable insights for clinicians. Need for the study/Rationale: Injectable Platelet-Rich Fibrin (i-PRF) and Micro-Osteoperforation (MOP) are two modalities known to accelerate tooth movement. i-PRF is a chemical modality, while MOP is a minimally invasive mechanical procedure. Both stimulate osteoclastic inflammatory cytokines, facilitating rapid tooth movement. However, there is limited evidence comparing the efficacy of these two methods. By comparing the mechanical i.e. MOP and chemical i.e. i-PRF modes of accelerated orthodontics, this planned protocol will study to determine the most feasible treatment modality based on objective patient outcomes, rate of tooth movement, and advantages/disadvantages. Aim: To evaluate and compare the effects of i-PRF and MOP on accelerated orthodontic movement in a young adult population. Materials and Methods: This split-mouth prospective randomised study will involve 10 participants selected from the departmental Out Patient Department (OPD) based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Informed consent will be obtained. The participants will be divided into two groups: Group A: Undergoing MOP Group B: Undergoing i-PRF Group allocation (left or right side) will be randomised. The rate of maxillary canine retraction will be measured after intervention in both study groups. Expected Results: Both i-PRF and MOP are expected to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement, with MOP being more effective in this regard.
Read full abstract