A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Slot Size on Pain and Oral Health-Related Quality of Life (OHRQoL) in Orthodontics during the First Month of Treatment with Conventional and Low-Friction Brackets

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Suggestions for Authors:

1. Inclusion criteria – to present the malocclusion problem more precisely, which plays an important role in the case of evaluating similar research studies in other research centers, the Little’s irregularity index  (1) should be added as the method of describing the degree of crowding in the place of ”dental bone discrepancy” or besides it. It is important to compare similar clinical research results using the same classifications. The degree of crowding plays an important factor in treatment possibilities and methods of treatment. If Authors compare their research results with the research where Little’s index was used (2) in the discussion section, they should also use the same index, or at least mention how the two indexes correlate with each other.
2. It looks like a mistake, that  ANB angle has 0 and 5 degrees, because it is impossible to have it together – please correct it or explain more detailed.
3. Whether and how patients were reminded about conducting their pain evaluation? Did they inform the examiner about their pain evaluation after entire week or just right after each measurement?
4. The Oral Health Impact Profile-14 questionnaire should be added in the attachment of the manuscript.
5. The conclusion section lists only the summary of the results, in fact. The article should end as a conclusion of the study, as some kind of message to persons who reads the article.

 

1. Little RM: The irregularity index: a quantitative score of mandibular anterior alignment. Am J Orthod 1975; 68, (5): 554-563.
2. Diddige R, Negi G, Kiran KVS, Chitra P: Comparison of pain levels in patients treated with 3 different orthodontic appliances - a randomized trial. Medicine and pharmacy reports 2020; 93, (1): 81-88.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study is interesting and was carried out with appropriate methodology and with scientific rigor, it is also interesting in the orthodontic field for a better understanding of the pain induced in the first weeks of orthodontic treatment (often causing anxiety on the part of the patient and with the possibility of treatment by the patient).

 

Only a few considerations need to be made to improve the manuscript.

• The lack of studies in the scientific literature is described , in this regard the design of the clinical study on which pre-existing research model is it based? What are the studies that would validate the correct methodology? These points should be better indicated and explained
• What are the pathological clinical reasons that cause maximum pain to occur between 24 and 48 hours after the start of treatment? What mechanisms are triggered that lead to a reduction of pain to a minimum at 7 days?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors of the manuscript answered all the questions and doubts raised about the study conducted. The article is worthy of publication.

Best Regards