Assessing the efficacy of guided miniscrew application in terms of patient comfort and clinical success

Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of guided miniscrew placement with direct miniscrew placement regarding patient comfort and clinical success. Method: This split-mouth study evaluated the effectiveness of miniscrews with a diameter of 1.5 mm and a length of 8 mm as anchorage during canine distalization in 34 patients who underwent upper first premolar extraction. As part of the canine distalization phase, the miniscrews were applied to provide anchorage between the roots of the second premolar and the first molar. A simple randomized method was used to determine the side for guided miniscrew placement. A guide was manually prepared using 0.021x0.025 and 0.019x0.025 inch stainless steel wires and 0.022 slot double tubes. Patients completed a questionnaire to compare the efficiency of direct and guided miniscrew applications in perceived time, comfort, and reproducibility. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were obtained during one month to assess their pain level. Clinical application times were recorded. The patients were followed during canine distalization to assess the miniscrews' success rate. Data were statistically analyzed. Results: Based on the first impression questionnaire, a significant difference was found in the perceived time between the applications (p<0.05). Additionally, the clinical application time was longer in guided miniscrew application (p<0.05). No significant difference was observed between the two applications regarding VAS scores and miniscrew success rates. Conclusion: Guided miniscrew application has shown similar results to direct application regarding comfort, reproducibility and pain. The use of a guide had no significant effect on the miniscrew success rate. Key words: Comfort, guide, miniscrew, pain, success