{"id":{"repo_id":"uic","oai_identifier":"oai:figshare.com:article/32993993"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/uic/oai:figshare.com:article/32993993","repository":{"repo_id":"uic","name":"University of Illinois - Chicago","base_url":"https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai"},"display":{"title":"Improving Clear Aligner Outcomes Using AI and Remote Dental Monitoring: Results from a Clinical Trial","abstract":"Teledentistry offers remote dental care, reducing the need for in-person visits. In orthodontics, tools such as Dental Monitoring™ (DM™) use artificial intelligence (AI), metaheuristics, and computer vision to track patient progress. This study aims to evaluate whether AI-powered remote Dental Monitoring™ can optimize orthodontic treatment efficiency, effectiveness, and patient experience by individualizing appliance change intervals while reducing in-office visits without compromising treatment outcomes. A total of 106 healthy subjects from the University of Illinois at Chicago were divided into three groups: one experimental group (DM™ with customized intervals) and two control groups (7- and 14-day aligner changes). To address this aim, the objectives were as follows: first, to compare orthodontic treatment outcomes between AI-guided remote Dental Monitoring™ and standard 7-day and 14-day aligner change protocols; second, to evaluate whether AI-based monitoring can optimize aligner change timing based on each patient’s biological response; third, to assess the impact of remote monitoring on treatment efficiency during the first six months of treatment; fourth, to examine whether remote monitoring influences the number of in-office visits; and finally, to compare patient satisfaction with the Dental Monitoring™ application between patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Descriptive statistics and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess distributions, and paired t-tests evaluated changes over time. At baseline, all three groups demonstrated comparable malocclusion severity, with no statistically or clinically significant differences in overall DI or OGS scores. Individual parameters further confirmed similar starting conditions. For treatment to be classified as improving, both DI and OGS scores were expected to decrease from T0 to T1 and from T0 to TF. Overall, DI and OGS scores decreased across all groups, indicating improvement in malocclusion. The only exception was the OGS score in Group 3 from T0 to TF, where a slight increase was observed. Despite this, no statistically significant differences were found among the three groups in overall DI or OGS score changes. These findings suggest that the treatment protocols resulted in comparable effectiveness across all groups. The lack of statistically significant differences indicates that the incorporation of Dental Monitoring™ did not negatively affect the quality of orthodontic outcomes. This supports the integration of remote monitoring into clear aligner therapy without compromising effectiveness, while maintaining outcomes comparable to traditional in-office protocols. Additionally, the similar outcomes observed among different wear protocols support consideration of individualized aligner change schedules rather than strict adherence to a standardized interval. No statistically significant differences were observed in total, scheduled, or emergency visits within the first six months among the Dental Monitoring™, 7-day, and 14-day groups, suggesting that, within this timeframe, remote monitoring did not substantially reduce visit frequency. The 14-day protocol demonstrated a significantly longer time to first refinement compared with the 7-day protocol, while no significant differences were observed between the Dental Monitoring™ group and either wear-interval group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the number of refinements. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was evaluated among patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Overall, both groups reported positive experiences with remote monitoring; however, patients treated with fixed appliances consistently reported higher satisfaction. In summary, the first null hypothesis was accepted, indicating no significant difference in treatment quality or effectiveness among the groups. The second null hypothesis was rejected, as a significant difference in patient satisfaction was found between clear aligner and fixed appliance patients. Taken together, these findings highlight that treatment outcomes were comparable across all groups, indicating that AI-based remote monitoring did not compromise treatment quality. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was generally positive, further supporting the integration of AI-powered remote monitoring into orthodontic care.","abstract_html":"Teledentistry offers remote dental care, reducing the need for in-person visits. In orthodontics, tools such as Dental Monitoring™ (DM™) use artificial intelligence (AI), metaheuristics, and computer vision to track patient progress. This study aims to evaluate whether AI-powered remote Dental Monitoring™ can optimize orthodontic treatment efficiency, effectiveness, and patient experience by individualizing appliance change intervals while reducing in-office visits without compromising treatment outcomes. A total of 106 healthy subjects from the University of Illinois at Chicago were divided into three groups: one experimental group (DM™ with customized intervals) and two control groups (7- and 14-day aligner changes). To address this aim, the objectives were as follows: first, to compare orthodontic treatment outcomes between AI-guided remote Dental Monitoring™ and standard 7-day and 14-day aligner change protocols; second, to evaluate whether AI-based monitoring can optimize aligner change timing based on each patient’s biological response; third, to assess the impact of remote monitoring on treatment efficiency during the first six months of treatment; fourth, to examine whether remote monitoring influences the number of in-office visits; and finally, to compare patient satisfaction with the Dental Monitoring™ application between patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Descriptive statistics and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess distributions, and paired t-tests evaluated changes over time. At baseline, all three groups demonstrated comparable malocclusion severity, with no statistically or clinically significant differences in overall DI or OGS scores. Individual parameters further confirmed similar starting conditions. For treatment to be classified as improving, both DI and OGS scores were expected to decrease from T0 to T1 and from T0 to TF. Overall, DI and OGS scores decreased across all groups, indicating improvement in malocclusion. The only exception was the OGS score in Group 3 from T0 to TF, where a slight increase was observed. Despite this, no statistically significant differences were found among the three groups in overall DI or OGS score changes. These findings suggest that the treatment protocols resulted in comparable effectiveness across all groups. The lack of statistically significant differences indicates that the incorporation of Dental Monitoring™ did not negatively affect the quality of orthodontic outcomes. This supports the integration of remote monitoring into clear aligner therapy without compromising effectiveness, while maintaining outcomes comparable to traditional in-office protocols. Additionally, the similar outcomes observed among different wear protocols support consideration of individualized aligner change schedules rather than strict adherence to a standardized interval. No statistically significant differences were observed in total, scheduled, or emergency visits within the first six months among the Dental Monitoring™, 7-day, and 14-day groups, suggesting that, within this timeframe, remote monitoring did not substantially reduce visit frequency. The 14-day protocol demonstrated a significantly longer time to first refinement compared with the 7-day protocol, while no significant differences were observed between the Dental Monitoring™ group and either wear-interval group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the number of refinements. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was evaluated among patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Overall, both groups reported positive experiences with remote monitoring; however, patients treated with fixed appliances consistently reported higher satisfaction. In summary, the first null hypothesis was accepted, indicating no significant difference in treatment quality or effectiveness among the groups. The second null hypothesis was rejected, as a significant difference in patient satisfaction was found between clear aligner and fixed appliance patients. Taken together, these findings highlight that treatment outcomes were comparable across all groups, indicating that AI-based remote monitoring did not compromise treatment quality. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was generally positive, further supporting the integration of AI-powered remote monitoring into orthodontic care.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Monika Soliman (24399548)"],"institution":null,"degree_name":null,"degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2026,"date_issued":"2026-05-01T00:00:00Z","date_published":"2026-05-01T00:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:33:41Z","subjects":["Artificial Intelligence","Orthodontics","Remote Monitoring","Dental Monitoring™"],"languages":[],"rights":["In Copyright"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.32993993.v1","outbound_label":"DOI","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Monika Soliman (24399548)"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2026-05-01T00:00:00Z"]},{"key":"dc:relation","label":"Dc Relation","values":["https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Improving_Clear_Aligner_Outcomes_Using_AI_and_Remote_Dental_Monitoring_Results_from_a_Clinical_Trial/32993993"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Text","Thesis"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Artificial Intelligence","Orthodontics","Remote Monitoring","Dental Monitoring™"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["In Copyright"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["10.25417/uic.32993993.v1"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["Teledentistry offers remote dental care, reducing the need for in-person visits. In orthodontics, tools such as Dental Monitoring™ (DM™) use artificial intelligence (AI), metaheuristics, and computer vision to track patient progress. This study aims to evaluate whether AI-powered remote Dental Monitoring™ can optimize orthodontic treatment efficiency, effectiveness, and patient experience by individualizing appliance change intervals while reducing in-office visits without compromising treatment outcomes. A total of 106 healthy subjects from the University of Illinois at Chicago were divided into three groups: one experimental group (DM™ with customized intervals) and two control groups (7- and 14-day aligner changes). To address this aim, the objectives were as follows: first, to compare orthodontic treatment outcomes between AI-guided remote Dental Monitoring™ and standard 7-day and 14-day aligner change protocols; second, to evaluate whether AI-based monitoring can optimize aligner change timing based on each patient’s biological response; third, to assess the impact of remote monitoring on treatment efficiency during the first six months of treatment; fourth, to examine whether remote monitoring influences the number of in-office visits; and finally, to compare patient satisfaction with the Dental Monitoring™ application between patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Descriptive statistics and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess distributions, and paired t-tests evaluated changes over time. At baseline, all three groups demonstrated comparable malocclusion severity, with no statistically or clinically significant differences in overall DI or OGS scores. Individual parameters further confirmed similar starting conditions. For treatment to be classified as improving, both DI and OGS scores were expected to decrease from T0 to T1 and from T0 to TF. Overall, DI and OGS scores decreased across all groups, indicating improvement in malocclusion. The only exception was the OGS score in Group 3 from T0 to TF, where a slight increase was observed. Despite this, no statistically significant differences were found among the three groups in overall DI or OGS score changes. These findings suggest that the treatment protocols resulted in comparable effectiveness across all groups. The lack of statistically significant differences indicates that the incorporation of Dental Monitoring™ did not negatively affect the quality of orthodontic outcomes. This supports the integration of remote monitoring into clear aligner therapy without compromising effectiveness, while maintaining outcomes comparable to traditional in-office protocols. Additionally, the similar outcomes observed among different wear protocols support consideration of individualized aligner change schedules rather than strict adherence to a standardized interval. No statistically significant differences were observed in total, scheduled, or emergency visits within the first six months among the Dental Monitoring™, 7-day, and 14-day groups, suggesting that, within this timeframe, remote monitoring did not substantially reduce visit frequency. The 14-day protocol demonstrated a significantly longer time to first refinement compared with the 7-day protocol, while no significant differences were observed between the Dental Monitoring™ group and either wear-interval group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the number of refinements. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was evaluated among patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Overall, both groups reported positive experiences with remote monitoring; however, patients treated with fixed appliances consistently reported higher satisfaction. In summary, the first null hypothesis was accepted, indicating no significant difference in treatment quality or effectiveness among the groups. The second null hypothesis was rejected, as a significant difference in patient satisfaction was found between clear aligner and fixed appliance patients. Taken together, these findings highlight that treatment outcomes were comparable across all groups, indicating that AI-based remote monitoring did not compromise treatment quality. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was generally positive, further supporting the integration of AI-powered remote monitoring into orthodontic care."]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Improving Clear Aligner Outcomes Using AI and Remote Dental Monitoring: Results from a Clinical Trial"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:creator":["Monika Soliman (24399548)"],"dc:date":["2026-05-01T00:00:00Z"],"dc:description":["Teledentistry offers remote dental care, reducing the need for in-person visits. In orthodontics, tools such as Dental Monitoring™ (DM™) use artificial intelligence (AI), metaheuristics, and computer vision to track patient progress. This study aims to evaluate whether AI-powered remote Dental Monitoring™ can optimize orthodontic treatment efficiency, effectiveness, and patient experience by individualizing appliance change intervals while reducing in-office visits without compromising treatment outcomes. A total of 106 healthy subjects from the University of Illinois at Chicago were divided into three groups: one experimental group (DM™ with customized intervals) and two control groups (7- and 14-day aligner changes). To address this aim, the objectives were as follows: first, to compare orthodontic treatment outcomes between AI-guided remote Dental Monitoring™ and standard 7-day and 14-day aligner change protocols; second, to evaluate whether AI-based monitoring can optimize aligner change timing based on each patient’s biological response; third, to assess the impact of remote monitoring on treatment efficiency during the first six months of treatment; fourth, to examine whether remote monitoring influences the number of in-office visits; and finally, to compare patient satisfaction with the Dental Monitoring™ application between patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Descriptive statistics and Shapiro-Wilk tests were used to assess distributions, and paired t-tests evaluated changes over time. At baseline, all three groups demonstrated comparable malocclusion severity, with no statistically or clinically significant differences in overall DI or OGS scores. Individual parameters further confirmed similar starting conditions. For treatment to be classified as improving, both DI and OGS scores were expected to decrease from T0 to T1 and from T0 to TF. Overall, DI and OGS scores decreased across all groups, indicating improvement in malocclusion. The only exception was the OGS score in Group 3 from T0 to TF, where a slight increase was observed. Despite this, no statistically significant differences were found among the three groups in overall DI or OGS score changes. These findings suggest that the treatment protocols resulted in comparable effectiveness across all groups. The lack of statistically significant differences indicates that the incorporation of Dental Monitoring™ did not negatively affect the quality of orthodontic outcomes. This supports the integration of remote monitoring into clear aligner therapy without compromising effectiveness, while maintaining outcomes comparable to traditional in-office protocols. Additionally, the similar outcomes observed among different wear protocols support consideration of individualized aligner change schedules rather than strict adherence to a standardized interval. No statistically significant differences were observed in total, scheduled, or emergency visits within the first six months among the Dental Monitoring™, 7-day, and 14-day groups, suggesting that, within this timeframe, remote monitoring did not substantially reduce visit frequency. The 14-day protocol demonstrated a significantly longer time to first refinement compared with the 7-day protocol, while no significant differences were observed between the Dental Monitoring™ group and either wear-interval group. There was also no statistically significant difference in the number of refinements. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was evaluated among patients treated with clear aligners and those treated with fixed appliances. Overall, both groups reported positive experiences with remote monitoring; however, patients treated with fixed appliances consistently reported higher satisfaction. In summary, the first null hypothesis was accepted, indicating no significant difference in treatment quality or effectiveness among the groups. The second null hypothesis was rejected, as a significant difference in patient satisfaction was found between clear aligner and fixed appliance patients. Taken together, these findings highlight that treatment outcomes were comparable across all groups, indicating that AI-based remote monitoring did not compromise treatment quality. Patient satisfaction with Dental Monitoring™ was generally positive, further supporting the integration of AI-powered remote monitoring into orthodontic care."],"dc:identifier":["10.25417/uic.32993993.v1"],"dc:relation":["https://figshare.com/articles/thesis/Improving_Clear_Aligner_Outcomes_Using_AI_and_Remote_Dental_Monitoring_Results_from_a_Clinical_Trial/32993993"],"dc:rights":["In Copyright"],"dc:subject":["Artificial Intelligence","Orthodontics","Remote Monitoring","Dental Monitoring™"],"dc:title":["Improving Clear Aligner Outcomes Using AI and Remote Dental Monitoring: Results from a Clinical Trial"],"dc:type":["Text","Thesis"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-27T21:33:41Z"}