Comparative Assessment of Clinical Effectiveness and Patient Acceptability of Hawley and Vacuum-Formed Retainers- An Analytical Study

ABSTRACT Background: Post-orthodontic retention is critical to prevent relapse and ensure long-term treatment stability. Among removable retainers, Hawley Retainers (HR) and Vacuum-Formed Retainers (VFR) are the most commonly prescribed. Aim: To evaluate and compare the clinical effectiveness and patient acceptance with Hawley retainers and Vacuum-formed retainers. Material and Methods: A total of 45 patients who completed fixed orthodontic treatment were randomly assigned to either HR (Group I) or VFR (Group II). Retainers were worn full-time for 6 months and at night for 3 months. Data were collected at debonding (T0), 3 months (T1), and 9 months (T2). Parameters assessed included archwidth changes (using dental casts), occlusal contacts (using Aluwax impressions), and patient acceptability (using a 10-point Visual Analogue Scale). Results: Arch Width: Significant intergroup differences were found, with Group II showing greater archwidth changes . Occlusal Contacts: Both groups showed an increase in anterior, posterior, and total occlusal contacts from T0 to T1; however, Group I demonstrated a significantly increase in contact points. Patient Acceptance: Group II shows statistically significant differences in appearance, speech, and self-esteem. Other parameters showed non-significant differences but trend was in favor of Group II. Conclusion: Both HR and VFR are clinically effective in maintaining orthodontic outcomes. HR promotes better occlusal settling, whereas VFR are more favored by patients for aesthetics and comfort. Clinical choice should consider both functional stability and patient preference. Keywords: Hawley, Essix, Retainer, Retention Techniques, VFR.