Perception of Iraqi Orthodontists and Patients toward Accelerated Orthodontics

Table 3

Willingness to use or undergo and pay for different procedures.

Appliance or technique	Group	Willingness to use/undergo/pay, n (%)					% of treatment fee increase, n (%)
		Very willing	Somewhat willing	Neutral	Somewhat not willing	Not willing	0%–20%	20%–40%	Above 40%
Customized appliances	Orthodontists	40 (16.2%)	120 (50.8%)	56 (23.7%)	20 (8.5%)	0	100 (42.4%)	128 (54.2%)	8 (3.4%)
	Patients	149 (38.4%)	115 (29.6%)	89 (22.9%)	26 (6.7%)	9 (2.3%)	225(58%)	142 (36.6%)	21 (5.4%)
Intraoral vibrating devices	Orthodontists	12 (5.1%)	116 (49.2%)	44 (18.6%)	28 (11.9%)	36 (15.3%)	142 (60.2%)	94 (39.80%)	0
	Patients	95 (24.5%)	148 (38.1%)	82 (21.1%)	41 (10.6%)	22 (5.7%)	278 (71.6%)	98 (25.3%)	12 (3.1%)
Corticotomies	Orthodontists	19 (8.1%)	78 (33.1%)	89 (37.7%)	29 (12.3%)	21 (8.9%)	88 (37.3%)	136 (57.6%)	12 (5.1%)
	Patients	23 (5.9%)	45 (11.6%)	65 (16.8%)	201 (51.8%)	54 (13.9%)	264 (68.0%)	109 (28.1%)	15 (3.9%)
Piezocision	Orthodontists	24 (10.2%)	116 (49.2%)	64 (27.1%)	20 (8.5%)	12 (5.1%)	96 (40.7%)	124 (52.5%)	16 (6.8%)
	Patients	32 (8.2%)	46 (11.9%)	92 (23.7%)	129 (33.7%)	89 (22.9%)	243 (62.6%)	126 (32.5%)	19 (4.9%)
Locally injected intraoral drugs	Orthodontists	8 (3.4%)	96 (40.7%)	80 (33.9%)	8 (3.4%)	44 (18.6%)	104 (44.1%)	120 (50.8%)	12 (5.1%)
	Patients	45 (11.6%)	78 (20.1%)	109 (28.1%)	91 (23.5%)	65 (16.8%)	223 (57.5%)	142 (36.6%)	23 (5.9%)