Comparative Evaluation of Efficacy of Physics Forceps versus Conventional Forceps in Orthodontic Extractions: A Prospective Randomized Split Mouth Study

• Main Authors: Harsh S Patel, Anil M Managutti, Shailesh Menat, Arvind Agarwal, Dishan Shah, Jigar Patel
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: JCDR Research and Publications Private Limited 2016-07-01
• Series: Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research
• Subjects: atraumatic extractions; bone loss; cortical plate; exodontia instrumentation; extraction complications; soft tissue loss
• Online Access: https://jcdr.net/articles/PDF/8160/17724_CE(Ra1)_F(GH)_PF1(ACAK)_PFA(AK)_PF2(PAG).pdf
• ISSN: 2249-782X; 0973-709X

Introduction: Tooth extraction is one of the most commonly performed procedures in dentistry. It is usually a traumatic procedure often resulting in immediate destruction and loss of alveolar bone and surrounding soft tissues. Various instruments have been described to perform atraumatic extractions which can prevent damage to the paradental structures. Recently developed physics forceps is one of the instruments which is claimed to perform atraumatic extractions. Aim: The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of physics forceps with conventional forceps in terms of operating time, prevention of marginal bone loss & soft tissue loss, postoperative pain and postoperative complications following bilateral premolar extractions for orthodontic purpose. Materials and Methods: In this prospective split-mouth study, outcomes of the 2 groups (n = 42 premolars) requiring extraction of premolars for orthodontic treatment purpose using Physics forceps and Conventional forceps were compared. Clinical outcomes in form of time taken, loss of buccal soft tissue and buccal cortical plate based on extraction defect classification system, postoperative pain and other complication associated with extraction were recorded and compared. Results: Statistically significant reduction in the operating time was noted in physics forceps group. Marginal bone loss and soft tissue loss was also significantly lesser in physics forceps group when compared to conventional forceps group. However, there was no statistically significant difference in severity of postoperative pain between both groups. Conclusion: The results of the present study suggest that physics forceps was more efficient in reducing operating time and prevention of marginal bone loss & soft tissue loss when compared to conventional forceps in orthodontically indicated premolar extractions.