000			08568namaa22004331i 4500
003			OSt
005			20250223033418.0
008			250126s2023 |||a|||f m||| 000 0 eng d
040			_aEG-GICUC _beng _cEG-GICUC _dEG-GICUC _erda
041	0		_aeng _beng _bara
049			_aDeposit
082	0	4	_a617.643
092			_a617.643 _221
097			_aM.Sc
099			_aCai01.09.06.M.Sc.2023.No.S
100	0		_aNoura Mohamed Hamza Hassan Saleh, _epreparation.
245	1	0	_aSmile arc assessment in orthodontic patients following smile arc protection versus mbt placement guide bonding strategies : _ba randomized clinical trial / _cby Noura Mohamed Hamza Hassan Saleh ; Supervisors Dr. Amr Hussein Labib, Dr. Mostafa Mohamed El Dawlatly, Dr. Mohamed Abd El Ghafour.
246	1	5	_aﻓﻲوﺿﻊ ﺣﺎﺻﺮات اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ MBT ﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻗﻮس اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺮﺿﻰ اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ﺑﻌﺪ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ : _bﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ ﺳﺮﯾﺮﯾﺔ ﻋﺸﻮاﺋﯿﺔ /
264		0	_c2023.
300			_a164 pages : _billustrations ; _c25 cm. + _eCD.
336			_atext _2rda content
337			_aUnmediated _2rdamedia
338			_avolume _2rdacarrier
502			_aThesis (M.Sc.)-Cairo University, 2023.
504			_aBibliography: pages 115-121.
520			_aAim: To subjectively assess the smile arc after bracket placement using Smile Arc Protection (SAP) approach versus McLaughlin, Bennett and Trevisi (MBT) placement guide. Secondly, to propose a method to evaluate the smile arc using extraoral frontal photograph of the posed smile. Methodology: Twenty patients with mild to moderate crowding or spacing in the upper arch were divided into two groups. In the SAP group, upper canine was used as a reference tooth for bracket placement, with upper lateral incisor bracket placed using the same measurement as the upper canine. Upper central incisor bracket was placed 0.5-1 mm gingivally compared to the upper canine. In the MBT group, brackets for upper canine and central incisor were placed using the same measurement, while bracket for upper lateral incisor was placed 0.5 mm incisally compared to upper canine. Frontal photographs of the posed smile captured at the end of the leveling and alignment or space closure phase were used for the rating of the smile arc using the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) by orthodontists. The same photographs were used to evaluate of the smile arc using millimetric measurements. Results: There was a statistically insignificant difference in the mean of VAS between both groups (6.7 for SAP group, 5.9 for MBT group, P-value > 0.05). Regarding the millimetric measurements, it was found that the MBT group had more negative values of right and left maxillary canines post-treatment, but paired differences between right and left, and pre-treatment and post- treatment values were statistically insignificant (P-value > 0.05). Conclusions: Based on this research findings, it was suggested that subjective smile arc perception did not differ according to the bracket placement strategy utilized, however, the study also found that MBT approach resulted in more extrusion of maxillary canines that might affect the overall appearance of the smile arc.
520			_aاﻟﮭﺪف اﻷوﻟﻲ: ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺑﻌﺪ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ دﻟﯿﻞ وﺿﻊ MBT ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻣﻘﯿﺎس اﻟﺘﻨﺎظﺮﯾﺔ اﻟﺒﺼﺮﯾﺔ. اﻟﮭﺪف اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻮي: ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻘﯿﺎﺳﺎت اﻟﻤﻠﯿﻤﺘﺮﯾﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﺻﻮر أﻣﺎﻣﯿﺔ ﺧﺎرج اﻟﻔﻢ ﻟﻼﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ اﻟﻈﺎھﺮة. اﻟﻤﻮاد واﻷﺳﺎﻟﯿﺐ: أﺟﺮﯾﺖ اﻟﺪراﺳﺔ اﻟﺴﺮﯾﺮﯾﺔ اﻟﻌﺸﻮاﺋﯿﺔ ﻟﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻗﻮس اﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺮﺿﻰ اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ اﻹﻧﺎث ﺑﻌﺪ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﻘﺎﺑﻞ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ MBT ﻓﻲ وﺿﻊ ﺣﺎﺻﺮات اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ﻋﻠﻰ ٢٠ ﻣﺮﯾﻀﺔ ﯾﻌﺎﻧﻮن ﻣﻦ ﺗﺰاﺣﻢ أو ﻣﺴﺎﻓﺎت ﺑﺴﯿﻄﺔ أو ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻔﻚ اﻟﻌﻠﻮي. ﻓﻲ اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋﺘﯿﻦ ﺗﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﺗﻘﻨﯿﺔ اﻟﻨﻘﻞ ﻏﯿﺮ اﻟﻤﺒﺎﺷﺮ ﻟﻠﺼﻖ اﻟﺤﺎﺻﺮات اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻤﯿﺔ، ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻨﺎب اﻟﻌﻠﻮي ﻛﻨﻘﻄﺔ ﺑﺪاﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﺼﻖ ﺣﺎﺻﺮات اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ، و ﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ ﺗﻢ ﻟﺼﻖ ﺣﺎﺻﺮة اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ﻟﻠﻘﺎطﻊ اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻲ اﻟﻌﻠﻮي ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻘﯿﺎس ذاﺗﮫ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺪم ﻟﻠﻨﺎب اﻟﻌﻠﻮي، و ﺗﻢ ﻟﺼﻖ اﻟﻘﺎطﻊ اﻷول ٠،٥ ﻣﻢ أو ١ ﻣﻢ ﺑﺎﺗﺠﺎه اﻟﻠﺜﺔ ﻣﻘﺎرﻧﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺎب اﻟﻌﻠﻮي، و ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ MBT ﺗﻢ ﻟﺼﻖ ﺣﺎﺻﺮات اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ﻟﻠﻨﺎب اﻟﻌﻠﻮي و اﻟﻘﺎطﻊ اﻷول اﻟﻌﻠﻮي ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﻘﯿﺎس ذاﺗﮫ، ﺑﯿﻨﻤﺎ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻘﺎطﻊ اﻟﻌﻠﻮي اﻟﺜﺎﻧﻲ ﺗﻢ ﻟﺼﻖ ﺣﺎﺻﺮة اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ٠.٥ ﻣﻢ ﻓﻲ اﺗﺠﺎه ﺑﻌﯿﺪا ﻋﻦ اﻟﻠﺜﺔ ، ﺗﻢ ﺗﺒﺪﯾﻞ أﺳﻼك اﻟﺘﻘﻮﯾﻢ ﺑﻄﺮﯾﻘﺔ ﺗﺴﻠﺴﻠﯿﺔ إﻟﻰ اﻻﻧﺘﮭﺎء ﻣﻦ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺮﺻﻒ و اﻟﺘﺴﻮﯾﺔ أو ﻏﻠﻖ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺎت و ﻣﻦ ﺛﻢ اﺳﺘﺨﺪام اﻟﺼﻮر اﻟﻔﻮﺗﻮﻏﺮاﻓﯿﺔ اﻟﺨﺎرﺟﯿﺔ اﻷﻣﺎﻣﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﻮﺣﺪة ﻟﺘﻘﯿﯿﻢ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺑﻄﺮﯾﻘﺔ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﻮﺿﻮﻋﯿﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻣﻘﯿﺎس اﻟﺘﻨﺎظﺮﯾﺔ اﻟﺒﺼﺮﯾﺔ. ﻣﻠﺨﺺ اﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ: ﺑﺎﻟﺮﻏﻢ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻌﺜﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﺮق ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﮭﻢ إﺣﺼﺎﺋﯿﺎً ﻓﻲ ﻣﺘﻮﺳﻂ ﻣﻘﯿﺎس اﻟﺘﻨﺎظﺮﯾﺔ اﻟﺒﺼﺮﯾﺔ ﺑﯿﻦ ﻛﻼ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋﺘﯿﻦ، اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻛﺎﻧﺖ أﻛﺜﺮ ﻧﺠﺎﺣﺎً ﻓﻲ ﺗﺤﺴﯿﻦ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﻘﺎرﻧﺔ ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ MBT. ﺑﺎﻟﻨﺴﺒﺔ ﻟﻠﻘﯿﺎﺳﺎت اﻟﻤﻠﯿﻤﯿﺘﺮﯾﺔ، ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﻘﺎرﻧﺔ اﻟﻘﯿﺎﺳﺎت ﻟﻸﺳﻨﺎن اﻷﻣﺎﻣﯿﺔ اﻟﻌﻠﻮﯾﺔ اﻟﺴﺘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻛﻼ اﻟﻤﺠﻤﻮﻋﺘﯿﻦ ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﺮﺣﻠﺔ اﻟﺮﺻﻒ واﻟﺘﺴﻮﯾﺔ أو ﻏﻠﻖ اﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺎت، ﺗﻢ اﻟﻌﺜﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ أن ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﺗﻢ اﻟﺤﻔﺎظ ﻋﻠﯿﮫ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ ﺣﻤﺎﯾﺔ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ وﺣﺪوث ﺗﺪھﻮر ﻓﻲ ﻗﻮس اﻻﺑﺘﺴﺎﻣﺔ ﻓﻲ اﺳﺘﺮاﺗﯿﺠﯿﺔ MBT. ﺗﻢ اﻟﻌﺜﻮر ﻋﻠﻰ أن ﻣﺠﻤﻮﻋﺔ MBT ﻛﺎﻧﺖ ﻟﮭﺎ ﻗﯿﻢ أﻛﺜﺮ ﺳﻠﺒﯿﺔ ﻷﻧﯿﺎب اﻟﻔﻚ اﻟﻌﻠﻮي اﻟﯿﻤﻨﻰ واﻟﯿﺴﺮى ﻋﻨﺪ ﺗﻘﯿﯿﻢ اﻟﻨﺘﺎﺋﺞ.
530			_aIssues also as CD.
546			_aText in English and abstract in Arabic & English.
650		7	_aOrthodontics _2qrmak
653		0	_aSmile Arc _aOrthodontic _aMBT _aGuide Bonding Strategies
700	0		_aAmr Hussein Labib _ethesis advisor.
700	0		_aMostafa Mohamed El Dawlatly _ethesis advisor.
700	0		_aMohamed Abd El-Ghafour _ethesis advisor.
900			_b01-01-2023 _cAmr Hussein Labib _cMostafa Mohamed El Dawlatly _cMohamed Abd El-Ghafour _dNadia Mosaad Mostafa El Harouni _dHala Munir Abd El Majeed _UCairo University _FFaculty of Dentistry _DDepartment of Orthodontics
905			_aShimaa _eHuda
942			_2ddc _cTH _e21 _n0
999			_c170427