Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4041/kjod21.255

Predicting patient experience of Invisalign treatment: An analysis using artificial neural network  

Xu, Lin (Department of Orthodontics, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University)
Mei, Li (Discipline of Orthodontics, Department of Oral Sciences, Sir John Walsh Research Institute, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Otago)
Lu, Ruiqi (Department of Electronic Engineering, Tsinghua University)
Li, Yuan (Department of Orthodontics, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University)
Li, Hanshi (Department of Orthodontics, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University)
Li, Yu (Department of Orthodontics, State Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases, National Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University)
Publication Information
The korean journal of orthodontics / v.52, no.4, 2022 , pp. 268-277 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: Poor experience with Invisalign treatment affects patient compliance and, thus, treatment outcome. Knowing the potential discomfort level in advance can help orthodontists better prepare the patient to overcome the difficult stage. This study aimed to construct artificial neural networks (ANNs) to predict patient experience in the early stages of Invisalign treatment. Methods: In total, 196 patients were enrolled. Data collection included questionnaires on pain, anxiety, and quality of life (QoL). A four-layer fully connected multilayer perception with three backpropagations was constructed to predict patient experience of the treatment. The input data comprised 17 clinical features. The partial derivative method was used to calculate the relative contributions of each input in the ANNs. Results: The predictive success rates for pain, anxiety, and QoL were 87.7%, 93.4%, and 92.4%, respectively. ANNs for predicting pain, anxiety, and QoL yielded areas under the curve of 0.963, 0.992, and 0.982, respectively. The number of teeth with lingual attachments was the most important factor affecting the outcome of negative experience, followed by the number of lingual buttons and upper incisors with attachments. Conclusions: The constructed ANNs in this preliminary study show good accuracy in predicting patient experience (i.e., pain, anxiety, and QoL) of Invisalign treatment. Artificial intelligence system developed for predicting patient comfort has potential for clinical application to enhance patient compliance.
Keywords
Computer algorithm; Pain; Compliance; Aligners;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Schwendicke F, Samek W, Krois J. Artificial intelligence in dentistry: chances and challenges. J Dent Res 2020;99:769-74.   DOI
2 Shahmoradi L, Safdari R, Mirhosseini MM, Arji G, Jannat B, Abdar M. Predicting risk of acute appendicitis: a comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression models predicting risk of acute appendicitis: a comparison of artificial neural network and logistic regression models. Acta Med Iran 2018;56:784-95.
3 Kok H, Acilar AM, Izgi MS. Usage and comparison of artificial intelligence algorithms for determination of growth and development by cervical vertebrae stages in orthodontics. Prog Orthod 2019;20:41.   DOI
4 Wang H, Minnema J, Batenburg KJ, Forouzanfar T, Hu FJ, Wu G. Multiclass CBCT image segmentation for orthodontics with deep learning. J Dent Res 2021;100:943-9.   DOI
5 Djeu G, Shelton C, Maganzini A. Outcome assessment of Invisalign and traditional orthodontic treatment compared with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:292-8; discussion 8.   DOI
6 Cardoso PC, Espinosa DG, Mecenas P, Flores-Mir C, Normando D. Pain level between clear aligners and fixed appliances: a systematic review. Prog Orthod 2020;21:3.   DOI
7 Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, Deregibus A, Debernardi CL. Periodontal health during clear aligners treatment: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod 2015;37:539-43.   DOI
8 Flores-Mir C, Brandelli J, Pacheco-Pereira C. Patient satisfaction and quality of life status after 2 treatment modalities: Invisalign and conventional fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018;154:639-44.   DOI
9 Simonyan K, Zisserman A. Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv. 1409.1556 [Preprint]. 2014 [cited 2020 Apr 1]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1409.1556.
10 Bartlett BW, Firestone AR, Vig KW, Beck FM, Marucha PT. The influence of a structured telephone call on orthodontic pain and anxiety. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;128:435-41.   DOI
11 Tanikawa C, Yamashiro T. Development of novel artificial intelligence systems to predict facial morphology after orthognathic surgery and orthodontic treatment in Japanese patients. Sci Rep 2021;11:15853.   DOI
12 Masood Y, Masood M, Zainul NN, Araby NB, Hussain SF, Newton T. Impact of malocclusion on oral health related quality of life in young people. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2013;11:25.   DOI
13 Wang J, Tang X, Shen Y, Shang G, Fang L, Wang R, et al. The correlations between health-related quality of life changes and pain and anxiety in orthodontic patients in the initial stage of treatment. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:725913.   DOI
14 Gao M, Yan X, Zhao R, Shan Y, Chen Y, Jian F, et al. Comparison of pain perception, anxiety, and impacts on oral health-related quality of life between patients receiving clear aligners and fixed appliances during the initial stage of orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod 2021;43:353-9.   DOI
15 Nedwed V, Miethke RR. Motivation, acceptance and problems of invisalign patients. J Orofac Orthop 2005;66:162-73.   DOI
16 Allareddy V, Nalliah R, Lee MK, Rampa S, Allareddy V. Adverse clinical events reported during Invisalign treatment: analysis of the MAUDE database. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;152:706-10.   DOI
17 Aljudaibi S, Duane B. Non-pharmacological pain relief during orthodontic treatment. Evid Based Dent 2018;19:48-9.   DOI
18 Al-Moghrabi D, Salazar FC, Pandis N, Fleming PS. Compliance with removable orthodontic appliances and adjuncts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2017;152:17-32.   DOI
19 Charavet C, Le Gall M, Albert A, Bruwier A, Leroy S. Patient compliance and orthodontic treatment efficacy of Planas functional appliances with TheraMon microsensors. Angle Orthod 2019;89:117-22.   DOI
20 Xie X, Wang L, Wang A. Artificial neural network modeling for deciding if extractions are necessary prior to orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 2010;80:262-6.   DOI
21 He SL, Wang JH. Reliability and validity of a Chinese version of the Oral Health Impact Profile for edentulous subjects. Qual Life Res 2015;24:1011-6.   DOI
22 Li P, Kong D, Tang T, Su D, Yang P, Wang H, et al. Orthodontic treatment planning based on artificial neural networks. Sci Rep 2019;9:2037.   DOI
23 Zhang Y, Liu R, Li G, Mao S, Yuan Y. The reliability and validity of a Chinese-version Short Health Anxiety Inventory: an investigation of university students. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat 2015;11:1739-47.
24 Katz J, Melzack R. Measurement of pain. Surg Clin North Am 1999;79:231-52.   DOI
25 Wanto A, Windarto AP, Hartama D, Parlina I. Use of binary sigmoid function and linear identity in artificial neural networks for forecasting population density. IJISTECH 2017;1:43-54.   DOI
26 Kingma DP, Ba J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. arXiv. 1412.6980 [Preprint]. 2014 [cited 2020 Apr 1]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980.
27 Guyon I. A scaling law for the validation-set training-set size ratio. Murray Hill: AT & T Bell Laboratories; 1997.
28 Sug H. The effect of training set size for the performance of neural networks of classification. WSEAS Trans Comput 2010;9:1297-306.
29 Youden WJ. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer 1950;3:32-5.   DOI
30 Gevrey M, Dimopoulos I, Lek S. Review and comparison of methods to study the contribution of variables in artificial neural network models. Ecol Model 2003;160:249-64.   DOI
31 Keith DJ, Rinchuse DJ, Kennedy M, Zullo T. Effect of text message follow-up on patient's self-reported level of pain and anxiety. Angle Orthod 2013;83:605-10.   DOI
32 Liu JL, Li SH, Cai YM, Lan DP, Lu YF, Liao W, et al. Automated radiographic evaluation of adenoid hypertrophy based on VGG-lite. J Dent Res 2021;100:1337-43.   DOI
33 Yu HJ, Cho SR, Kim MJ, Kim WH, Kim JW, Choi J. Automated skeletal classification with lateral cephalometry based on artificial intelligence. J Dent Res 2020;99:249-56.   DOI
34 Thai JK, Araujo E, McCray J, Schneider PP, Kim KB. Esthetic perception of clear aligner therapy attachments using eye-tracking technology. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2020;158:400-9.   DOI
35 Jung SK, Kim TW. New approach for the diagnosis of extractions with neural network machine learning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149:127-33.   DOI