CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND POST-INSERTION PAIN FOLLOWING ORTHODONTIC MINI-IMPLANT PLACEMENT AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 175
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59354/ydth175.2026.462Keywords:
mini-implant, orthodontics, post-procedural pain, visual analogue scaleAbstract
Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of patients receiving mini-implants and to evaluate post-insertion pain in orthodontic treatment at Military Hospital 175.
Materials and Methods: A descriptive study with analytical components was conducted on 32 patients undergoing 60 mini-implant insertions. Pre-procedural anxiety and post-procedural pain were assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS). Pain was recorded immediately after insertion and at 24 hours, 3 days, and 7 days. Pain changes over time and their associations with selected factors were analyzed.
Results: The mean age at first mini-implant insertion was 21.97 ± 5.86 years, and female patients accounted for 78.1% of the sample. The mean number of mini-implants per insertion was 1.76 ± 0.65, with two mini-implants per insertion being the most common pattern (60.0%). Mean VAS pain scores immediately after insertion, at 24 hours, 3 days, and 7 days were 5.78 ± 2.31, 2.88 ± 1.62, 1.62 ± 1.14, and 0.70 ± 0.81, respectively. Pain decreased significantly over time (p < 0.001). Pre-procedural anxiety showed a significant positive correlation with pain scores at all follow-up time points, whereas the number of mini-implants inserted was not significantly associated with post-insertion pain.
Conclusions: Mini-implant placement in orthodontic treatment was performed predominantly in young female patients, and most procedures involved one or two mini-implants. Post-insertion pain was greatest immediately after placement, decreased markedly after 24 hours, and continued to decline thereafter. Pre-procedural anxiety was significantly associated with post-insertion pain.
References
1. Vale F, Travassos R, Couto I et al (2025). Patient’s perspective on miniscrews during orthodontic treatment - a systematic review with meta-analysis. Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, 28(2), 217-241.
2. Del Rosso C, Poli P.P, Ghizzoni M et al (2025). Clinical management of orthodontic miniscrew complications: a scoping review. Dentistry Journal, 13(12), 582.
3. Kuroda S, Sugawara Y, Deguchi T et al (2007). Clinical use of miniscrew implants as orthodontic anchorage: success rates and postoperative discomfort. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 131(1), 9-15.
4. Zawawi K.H (2014). Acceptance of orthodontic miniscrews as temporary anchorage devices. Patient Preference and Adherence, 8, 933-937.
5. Ganzer N, Feldmann I, Bondemark L (2016). Pain and discomfort following insertion of miniscrews and premolar extractions: a randomized controlled trial. The Angle Orthodontist, 86(6), 891-899.
6. Koseler B.C, Yilanci H, Ramoglu S.I (2019). Does audiovisual information affect anxiety and perceived pain levels in miniscrew application? - a within-person randomized controlled trial. Progress in Orthodontics, 20(1), 29.
7. Crismani A.G, Bertl M.H, Celar A.G et al (2010). Miniscrews in orthodontic treatment: review and analysis of published clinical trials. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 137(1), 108-113.
8. Ngô Việt Thành, Nguyễn Thị Thu Phương, Lê Thị Thu Hải (2021). Đặc điểm và cách sử dụng vít neo chặn ngoài xương ổ răng trong chỉnh hình răng mặt. Tạp chí Y Dược học Lâm sàng 108, 16(7), 86-91.
9. Lê Huy Thục Mỹ, Ngô Thanh Nhi (2025). Đánh giá độ dày mô mềm vùng đường giữa khẩu cái trên phim chụp cắt lớp chùm tia hình nón (CBCT). Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 553(3), 137-141.
10. Yongyout Silavanh, Nguyễn Thị Bích Ngọc (2025). Kích thước xương ổ răng hàm trên ở bệnh nhân sai khớp cắn hạng II trên phim CTCB. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam, 546(1), 225-229
