The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning

Since its introduction, cephalometrics, i.e. cephalometric radiography and analysis, has been used for orthodontic treatment planning. However, the effectiveness of this diagnostic method remains questionable. A randomized crossover study was designed to assess the influence of cephalometrics in orthodontic treatment planning of individual patients. Diagnostic records of 48 subjects (24 males and 24 females aged 11-14 years) were divided in two stratified groups and assigned to one of two combinations: A, dental casts only, and B, dental casts, cephalometric radiographs, and analysis. The records were presented to 10 orthodontic postgraduates and four orthodontists for formulation of orthodontic treatment plans containing a dichotomous decision regarding the use of a functional appliance (FUNC), rapid maxillary expansion (RME), and extraction (EXTR). The combination of FUNC + RME + EXTR was used as the basis of the outcome measure. Agreement on orthodontic treatment planning using all possible comparisons of diagnostic records of individual patients (AB, AA, and BB) was assessed and overall proportions of agreement (OPA) were calculated for orthodontic postgraduates and orthodontists separately. Median OPA were 0.60 (AB), 0.65 (AA), and 0.60 (BB) for orthodontic postgraduates and 0.50 (AB), 0.75 (AA), and 0.50 (BB) for orthodontists. Irrespective of the level of experience, neither consistency of orthodontic treatment planning between both combinations of diagnostic records showed a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05) using Wilcoxon signed rank test nor did consistencies and agreement of orthodontic treatment planning after the addition of cephalometrics. It appears that cephalometrics are not required for orthodontic treatment planning, as they did not influence treatment decisions.     

Influence of lateral cephalometric radiography in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning

Objective:To evaluate the impact of additional lateral cephalometric radiography in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.Materials and Methods:Forty-three patients seeking orthodontic treatment, and for whom pretreatment diagnostic records were available, were randomly selected. Ten qualified orthodontists were involved in this study. The patients'' records included three photographs of the angle trimmed dental casts, digital lateral cephalometric and panoramic radiographs, and standard clinical photographs comprising seven intra- and four extraoral pictures. Records were evaluated in two sessions. At the first session, orthodontists evaluated records without lateral cephalometric radiography (LCR). In the second session, the same information was presented, but with LCR. Between the two sessions the order in which the cases were presented was altered to avoid bias.Results:The percentage of agreement between sessions was lower for diagnosis than for treatment planning. Concerning skeletal classification, the least experienced orthodontist was the least consistent (28%), while the more experienced orthodontist was the more reliable (67%). In terms of treatment modalities, in general there was an agreement of 64%. The most frequent modifications in treatment modalities were seen in Class II malocclusion patients.Conclusions:The results of our study suggest that the majority of Portuguese orthodontists judge that LCR is important to producing a treatment plan. Despite that, it does not seem to have an influence on orthodontic treatment planning.     

Early Orthodontic Treatment of Class-III Malocclusion in Germany

In order to evaluate current attitudes to early interceptive treatment, 2001 orthodontic offices in Germany were asked to fill in a questionnaire comprising the following topics: indication, appliances for the early correction of Class-III malocclusions, diagnostic records, duration, and benefits to overall therapy. Based on the 677 evaluable questionnaires, the following statistically significant conclusions could be drawn: 92.6% of the orthodontists see Class-III malocclusion as an indication for early treatment. Early treatment of severe crowding, diastemata, Class-II malocclusion, deep bite, increased overjet and impacted incisors was declined by most orthodontists. The interceptive treatment of further malocclusions was controversially discussed. Functional appliances (67.5%), in particular the Fr?nkel III (47.3%), were dominant in correction of Class-III malocclusions. Typical orthodontic records relating to early interceptive treatment include panoramic radiographs, lateral headfilms, photos and dental casts. 2.5% of the orthodontists routinely take a hand-wrist radiograph. Although recently published studies support the use of facial masks in theory, they are rarely used in practice. To what extent early interceptive treatment of Class-III malocclusion influences the overall treatment is the subject of further studies.     

A validation study of three indexes of orthodontic treatment need in the United States

Abstract The purpose of this study was to compare the reliability and validity of three occlusal indexes of orthodontic treatment need in predicting the opinion of treatment need of a panel of 18 orthodontists. A set of 160 study casts representing all types of malocclusion was used. The casts were scored with the following occlusal indexes: the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN), the Handicapping Labio-Lingual Deviations index (HLD), and the Handicapping Malocclusion Assessment Record (HMAR modified). The diagnostic accuracy or validity of each index was calculated using the mean opinion of the orthodontic raters as a “gold standard”. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were plotted for each index. The overall diagnostic accuracy, as determined by percent area under the curve, was similar for each index: IOTN 98.6%; HLD 96.1%; HMAR 96.6%. The score optimizing the sensitivity and specificity relationship for each index was as follows: IOTN (dental health component) 4; HLD 13; HMAR 12. These results indicate that the three occlusal indexes provided valuable information for determining orthodontic treatment need.     

Treatment strategies for lower third molars following orthodontic care.

Abstract

To examine the extent to which orthodontists consider it appropriate to refer post-orthodontic patients for lower third molar treatment. The subjects were 10 orthodontists from hospital, specialist practice and community setting. Participants were presented with 15 case histories of orthodontic patients (including full records) and asked to state whether they would have referred the case to an oral surgeon for management of their third molars. Data were analysed using multi-kappa measure. Two-hundred-and-sixty-two decisions of 300 (88%) were not to refer cases for third molar management. Little consensus was seen between orthodontists on which post-orthodontic cases referral (kappa = 0.14). Some clinicians referred cases much more frequently than others (Kruskall-Wallis = 46.84, P < 0.001) and some clinicians referred much more frequently (Kruskall-Wallis = 85.57, P < 0.001). This group of orthodontists did not refer post-orthodontic cases for third molar management and little consensus was observed regarding which cases did warrant removal.     

Contribution of pretreatment radiographs to orthodontists' decision making

A study was conducted to determine the amount of diagnostic and treatment planning information gained by orthodontists when pretreatment radiographs are added to a set of orthodontic records. Thirty-nine orthodontists evaluated six test cases and formulated a diagnosis and treatment plan. Information was collected about the participants' certainty with their diagnoses and treatment plans, the impact of the radiographs, the number and type of radiographs that were selected, and the difficulty of each case. Results showed that orthodontists were approximately 75% confident of their diagnosis before reviewing any radiograph. There were 741 radiographs ordered, of which 192 produced changes to the diagnostic process. The lateral cephalometric radiograph was the most productive. Panoramic and full-mouth series were productive but provided largely duplicative information.     

Prevalence of traumatic injuries to the permanent incisors in candidates for orthodontic treatment

Abstract  – The dental records made on presentation of 1367 consecutive patients (731 females and 636 males) for orthodontic treatment at a private orthodontic practice between 1998 and 2002 were examined for data relating to trauma to the permanent incisors. The results showed that 10.3% of these patients had suffered from dental trauma before the onset of orthodontic treatment. The highest prevalence of dental trauma was determined in the 11–15 years age group, corresponding to the dental developmental stage of the late mixed dentition. The most frequently affected teeth were the maxillary central incisors (79.6%), and the most common types of trauma were fracture of enamel–dentin without pulpal involvement (42.7%) and fracture of enamel (33.8%). Compared to patients with normal overjet and adequate lip coverage, the frequency of dental trauma was significantly higher in patients with increased overjet and adequate lip coverage ( P  = 0.028) or with increased overjet and inadequate lip coverage ( P  = 0.003). The results of the present study indicate that a significant percentage of candidates for orthodontic treatment, and especially those with increased overjet and inadequate lip coverage, suffer trauma to their permanent incisors before the onset of orthodontic treatment. It might also be concluded that preventive orthodontic treatment of such patients should be initiated and completed before the age of 11, i.e. in the early to middle mixed dentition.     

The effectiveness and efficiency of hygienists in carrying out orthodontic auxiliary procedures.

The aim of this study was to compare the ability and efficiency of dental hygienists, after preliminary training as orthodontic auxiliaries, with post-graduate orthodontists. The study was cross-sectional and prospective. The sample consisted of five second-year hygienists and five qualified orthodontists from Manchester University Dental Hospital. All subjects carried out a range of orthodontic exercises on phantom head typodonts. The ability and efficiency for each task was measured, and comparison made between hygienists and orthodontic groups. There was no statistically significant differences between hygienists and orthodontists in terms of their ability to carry out potential orthodontic auxiliary procedures. However, orthodontists were more efficient (P < 0.05). The ability of hygienists to carry out potential orthodontic auxiliary tasks after appropriate training is supported. Trained orthodontists are more efficient than newly trained hygienists in carrying out potential orthodontic auxiliary tasks.     

��ǻ�����ٴ���Ӱ����Ҫ��ͽ�չ

??Dental photographs are essential parts of clinic data in orthodontics??which offer important information for diagnosis??treatment planning and follow-up. Dental photography was introduced to orthodontics much earlier than other dental specialty. It makes valuable attribution to soft tissue analysis. In orthodontics??close attention is focused on not only occlusion but also soft tissue harmony. For this??standard dental photography has been set up for orthodontic purpose. This article mainly discussed characteristics and standard of orthodontic photography??including the “photograph set” preferred by most orthodontists??key points in extra-oral photographs and intra-oral photographs and help tips for successful photographs.     

口腔正畸临床摄影技术要点和进展

影像资料是口腔正畸不可或缺的临床资料,与牙牙合模型以及X线片一样已在正畸医生的临床工作中起着不可或缺的作用。口腔正畸学科是口腔学科中较早引入临床摄影的,这与口腔正畸不仅关注牙齿排列与咬合关系,而且在矫治设计与临床治疗中同样重视患者面部的美学特征密切相关。并且建立了比较公认的摄影内容和摄影技术。本文讨论了口腔正畸学科临床摄影的内容、特点、一般规律、规范性要求,以及与其他学科在摄影方面的不同之处,并且详细介绍了正畸患者面像和牙合像摄影的注意事项。     

Geographic distribution of specialist orthodontists and orthodontic providers in Japan

ObjectiveThis study aimed to clarify the geographic distribution of specialist orthodontists and dentists who provide orthodontic services in Japan.MethodsWe obtained data on the populations of 1750 municipalities in Japan in 2010 by referring to the census. We obtained data on the number of dentists who mainly provide orthodontic services (specialist orthodontists) and the number of dentists, including general dentists, who provide orthodontic services (orthodontic providers), by referring to the Survey of Physicians, Dentists, and Pharmacists. Furthermore, we referred to the directory on the website of the Japanese Orthodontic Society (JOS) to obtain data on JOS-qualified orthodontists. To assess the distribution of specialist orthodontists and orthodontic providers, we used Lorenz curves and Gini coefficients.ResultsThe median value for the number of specialist orthodontists and number of JOS-certified orthodontists per 100,000 persons aged between 5 and 40 years old was 0, while that of orthodontic providers was 27.5. Gini coefficients for specialist orthodontists and JOS-certified orthodontists were 0.523 and 0.615, respectively. On the other hand, the Gini coefficient for orthodontic providers was 0.258.ConclusionsRegional inequalities in the availability of specialist orthodontists are high, and medical access to specialist orthodontic services may be limited in areas other than urban districts. In municipalities with a population of fewer than 50,000 inhabitants, the number of specialist orthodontists was very low, but orthodontic providers were relatively evenly distributed. Our research results suggested that studying the distribution of specialist orthodontists and orthodontic providers can provide valuable information for developing dental care policies.     

Assessment of orthodontic treatment need: a comparison of study models and facial photographs

Abstract – Objectives: The current study aims to examine how orthodontic treatment need is prioritized depending upon whether dental study models or facial photographs are used as the means of assessment. Methods: A group of three orthodontists and three postgraduate orthodontic students assessed: (i) dental attractiveness; and (ii) need for orthodontic treatment in 40 subjects (19 males, 21 females). The 40 subjects displayed a range of malocclusions. Separate assessments were made from study models and facial photographs. Results: There was a bias towards higher scores for dental attractiveness from facial photographs compared with assessment of study casts, for all examiners. This was statistically significant for five of the six examiners (P = 0.001–0.101). The need for orthodontic treatment was rated as 20% higher from study models compared with facial photographs (P < 0.001); overall the level of need for orthodontic treatment was rated as 18.9% higher from study models compared with facial photographs (P < 0.001). Reproducibility analyses showed that there was a considerable variation in the intra‐ and inter‐examiner agreement. Conclusions: This study shows that a group of three orthodontists and three postgraduate students in orthodontics: (i) rated orthodontic treatment need higher from study models compared with facial photographs and; (ii) rated dental attractiveness higher from facial photographs compared with study models. It is suggested that the variable intra‐examiner agreement may result from the assessment of orthodontic treatment need and dental attractiveness in the absence of any specific assessment criteria. The poor reproducibility of assessment of orthodontic treatment need and dental attractiveness in the absence of strict criteria may suggest the need to use an appropriate index.     

The delivery of orthodontic care in New Zealand. Part I: Analysis of a census of orthodontists.

A two-part study was undertaken to determine the supply of orthodontic services in New Zealand. Part I focuses on services supplied by specialist orthodontists. A companion paper will describe the amount and characteristics of orthodontic services supplied by dentists. All orthodontists in New Zealand in 1999 were surveyed to provide information on practice location and days practiced in 1996 (the year of the last population Census), and the amount and type of orthodontic treatment carried out in the year 1 July 1998 to 30 June 1999. The response rate was 78.9 percent. Data from 1996 were used to establish and quantify the location and distribution of orthodontists in New Zealand, and their spatial relationship to 12-year-olds and 10- to 14-year-olds using Geographic Information Systems. The information from 1998-1999 was used to determine the amount and variety of services provided by orthodontists and the makeup of their patient base. Nearly two-thirds of orthodontists had a branch practice. Over 50 percent of the 10- to 14-year-old population resided within 5 km of an orthodontist, and nearly three-quarters within 10 km. Disparities between regions existed in the supply of specialist orthodontic services. The catchment areas of main urban areas had more than three times the supply of orthodontists to 12-year-olds than did the secondary and minor urban areas combined. The mean average active patient load was 371, and the mean number of full upper and lower fixed appliances placed was 130.3 during the year of the study. Nearly half of all patients had been referred from dentists, approximately one-quarter were self-referred, and a quarter had been referred by dental therapists. Adults comprised 12.1 percent of the patient load of orthodontists; 60 percent were female.     

Outcome of a scheme for specialist orthodontic care

With the purpose of examining the outcome of specialist orthodontic care on a population level (Halland, Sweden), a random sample of previously treated 19-year-olds (n=118) was clinically examined and interviewed. Thirty-three per cent of the cohort (n=1554) had received treatment, and mean treatment time was 19 months requiring 20 visits. Changes in occlusion were assessed using the PAR Index applied to dental study casts representing the pre- and post-treatment and follow-up (19 years) condition. The subjects' responses to questions addressing their past and present attitudes to dental appearance and orthodontic treatment were combined to represent "orthodontic concern", at the pre-treatment stage and at 19 years of age. A mean reduction in weighted PAR scores of 83% was observed from pre-treatment to post-treatment, whereas at follow-up, the net improvement was 69%. A significant shift in attitudes was observed, as 72% of the individuals expressed orthodontic concern pre-treatment compared to less than 10% at 19 years. The improvement obtained was similar to other studies on outcome of orthodontic treatment provided by specialist orthodontists. Compared to most PAR-studies providing information about orthodontic services, the present scheme appeared to be efficient on the assumption that duration of treatment and number of visits are expressions of costs.     

Briefing of Orthodontic Patients

The aim of this study was to record the level of relevant knowledge among orthodontic patients and their parents in order to determine how they prepare for the first consultation and what level of orthodontic briefing is needed. The focus was on the response of young patients to briefing, with other objectives being to investigate what briefing media are used by orthodontists for patient motivation and improved compliance as well as the extent to which new briefing media are needed. Two hundred 9- to 12-year-old patients and their parents were interviewed, using a standardized questionnaire to record their knowledge and their need for information on orthodontic matters. In addition, 200 orthodontists were asked to fill in a questionnaire and to return it together with the briefing material used by them. The response rate was 62%.--To obtain an overview of the orthodontic briefing material available, various institutions (PR offices of health insurance companies, professional associations, specialist publishing houses, regional study groups) were approached with written requests for relevant material. Currently available children's books with dental or orthodontic subject matter were also scrutinized. 74% of children wanted to learn more about their orthodontic treatment and 40% expressed anxiety, in particular towards fixed appliances and impression-taking. 98% of orthodontists reported that the briefing interview was the main source of information. Despite being the person primarily in need of motivation, however, the child was not the focus of attention at the first consultation, even though that consultation was the preferred source of information for 51% of children. Other briefing media, consisting mainly of demonstration models and leaflets, were used primarily in the orthodontist's waiting room and surgery. Space-taking media (video films, computers) were rarely used, as were books. It is concluded that there is a clear-cut need for the orthodontic briefing process to be improved.     

Distribution of orthodontic services and fees in an insured population in Washington.

Previous attempts to quantify the amount and type of orthodontic therapy provided by nonorthodontists in the United States have relied on survey data. Although there are advantages to surveys, such as control over survey recipients and inclusion of specific questions, they also have limitations, such as low response rates, response bias, and recall bias. This study used insurance claims data from a large dental benefits provider in Washington to assess the distribution of orthodontic services and fees among various dental providers. All orthodontic claims allowed by Washington Dental Service in 2001 were retrieved, along with treatment codes, fees, and demographic information for both patients and providers. A total of 102,984 orthodontic claims were included in the study. General dentists submitted 7.0% of these claims, orthodontists submitted 90.9%, and pedodontists submitted 1.9%. Orthodontists submitted higher average fees for space maintainers, first payments, and records. The percentage of orthodontic treatment preformed by general dentists and pedodontists in this claims-based study was substantially less than what has been previously reported in survey-based studies. Additionally, a smaller percentage of general dentists and pedodontists in this study performed comprehensive treatment, compared with previous studies. This study illustrates the value of insurance claims data to assess the provision of orthodontic care.     

The role of occlusion and extraction in orthodontics. Historical overview

Occlusion is important in each unit of dentistry. The authors describe not only the meaning of normal occlusion and dysgnathy but also the historical background focusing on the most important orthodontists, their achievements and literary works. This article gives an overview of the development of orthodontics from the very beginning (ancient times) to nowadays. The most important figures of these periods are: P. Fauchard, F. C. Kneisel, E. H. Angle, C. Case (dark ages); C. F. Ballard, P. R. Begg, C. H. Tweed (golden ages); L. F. Andrews and R. H. Roth (contemporary period). Along these three eras development and changing of the extraction-principles are shown. Nowadays the orthodontists still use Angle's classification and orthodontic treatment with extraction is also accepted. However it is not a separate treatment method, but only used as complement treatment. The authors stress on the importance of normal occlusion, which should be result of every orthodontic, but also prothetic and gnathological treatment.     

Long-term profile changes in extraction and nonextraction patients.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this investigation was to determine the long-term differences in soft tissue profile changes between extraction and nonextraction patients who had been treated to the same incisor position and lip line. METHODS: Twenty extraction and 20 matched nonextraction patients, with posttreatment and long-term follow-up (average 15 years) records, were selected from a single private orthodontic practice. Posttreatment and long-term follow-up profile photos of the patients' nose, lip, and chin areas were evaluated by 105 orthodontists and 225 laypeople, who indicated their preferences and the amount of change they perceived among the 40 profiles. The patients had similar dental protrusion, soft tissue profile measurements, and ages at the posttreatment observation. RESULTS: No significant cephalometric differences between the extraction and nonextraction groups were found at long-term follow-up; both groups showed similar long-term changes. Significant (P < .05) differences were found between males and females at long-term follow-up; male lips became relatively more retrusive, and their profiles became flatter. Significant (P < .05) changes in the profiles were also perceived over time, but there was no relationship between the amount of change perceived and profile changes measured cephalometrically. There were also no significant (P < .05) differences in preferences between orthodontists and laypeople, between extraction and nonextraction patients, or between males and females. CONCLUSIONS: If extraction and nonextraction patients are treated to the same incisor position and lip line, the treatment modality does not affect long-term soft tissue profile changes. Furthermore, the amounts of change perceived by either orthodontists or laypeople were not related to the amount of change measured cephalometrically.