Search

Objectives: To determine recognition ability and the levels of esthetic tolerance of deep bite and anterior open bite (AOB) among laypeople and investigate the factors affecting levels of tolerance., Materials and Methods: Using a questionnaire, laypeople (N = 100) were examined, and overbite was measured. They were tested for whether they recognized deep bite and AOB. Esthetic tolerance thresholds for deep bite and AOB were selected by incremental depiction in grayscale images. Stepwise logistic regression analyses were used to quantify the effect of recognition and other factors (age, sex, education level, occupation, history of orthodontic treatment, interest in orthodontic treatment or retreatment, and overbite presence) affecting the tolerance of overbite problems (α = 0.05)., Results: Of the participants, 55% and 94% recognized deep bite and AOB, respectively. Participants with a deep bite were significantly more likely to esthetically tolerate deep bite compared with those without a deep bite (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-9.89). Participants who recognized a deep bite problem had significantly lower esthetic tolerance to deep bite compared with participants who did not recognize a deep bite (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.06-0.45). None of the other eight chosen factors significantly affected the tolerance level of AOB (P > .05)., Conclusions: Participants with a deep bite or those who did not recognize a deep bite had significantly higher esthetic tolerance of deep bite than those without or those who recognized the problem (P < .05)., (© 0000 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.)

Objectives: To compare the effects of two common methods of overbite reduction on smile esthetics., Materials and Methods: A prospective clinical trial was conducted with 32 patients in whom overbite reduction was achieved using a maxillary incisor intrusion arch (18 patients) or flat anterior bite plate (14 patients). Clinical and cephalometric records were compared pretreatment (T1), after overbite reduction (T2), and posttreatment (T3)., Results: Both treatment groups experienced a reduction in overbite and maxillary and mandibular incisor proclination during treatment (T1-T3). The center of resistance of the maxillary incisor and the incisal edge was significantly intruded in the intrusion arch group during overbite reduction (T1-T2). However, most of the intrusion of the center of resistance was lost by the end of treatment (T2-T3). Both treatment groups experienced a reduction in maxillary incisor display and flattening of the smile arc during overbite reduction., Conclusions: Both overbite reduction methods caused a decrease in incisor display and flattening of the smile arc. Smiles were improved in some patients by the end of treatment. However, reduction in incisor display persisted. Clinicians should take precautions to prevent negative effects of overbite reduction.

Objectives: To investigate the reliability and accuracy of a monitoring system in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with a rapid maxillary expander. Specifically, the amount of tooth movement calculated by the software was compared with the actual measurements taken on plaster models obtained during an in-office visit., Materials and Methods: Patients took intraoral video scans using the monitoring software's smartphone application (Dental Monitoring, Paris, France), immediately followed by impressions for plaster models. Intercanine and intermolar width measurements were calculated by the software and compared with those made on the plaster models. Data were analyzed using two one-sided t -tests for equivalence with equivalence bounds of ±0.5 mm. The significance level was set at .05., Results: Thirty sets of measurements were compared. The intercanine and intermolar measurement differences were on average 0.17 mm and -0.02 mm, respectively, and were deemed equivalent., Conclusions: The monitoring software seems to provide an accurate assessment of linear tooth movements.

Objective: To measure the changes in tooth mobility, alveolar bone, and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-B ligand (RANKL)/osteoprotegerin (OPG) in the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) during orthodontic treatment to regain incisal function in the presence and absence of biting exercises., Materials and Methods: Thirty-six females (42.3 ± 6.5 years old) with periodontally compromised upper incisors received orthodontic treatment to obtain ideal incisor relationships. Eighteen subjects in the experimental biting exercise group were instructed to bite a soft plastic roll for 5 min/d; the 18 control subjects were not given plastic rolls. Alveolar bone thickness, height, and density around the upper incisors were assessed at three root levels using cone-beam computed tomography. GCF was collected at the labial and palatal sites of the upper incisors at pretreatment (T0), end of treatment (T1), 1 month after T1 (T2), and 7 months after T1 (T3). RANKL/OPG was determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays., Results: Labial and palatal bone thickness significantly increased (>twofold) from T1 to T3 in the experimental group at all three root levels (all P < .05). Bone thickness correlated negatively with RANKL/OPG ratio between T1 and T2 ( P < .05). Tooth mobility, bone height, and density were not significantly different between T1 and T3., Conclusions: Biting exercises significantly increased bone thickness but did not affect tooth mobility, bone height, or density. The RANKL/OPG ratio decreased 1 month after treatment (T2) and correlated with increased bone thickness. ( ClinicalTrials.in.th TCTR20170625001).

Objective: To compare alveolar bone thickness and height changes between untreated incisors (control), incisors advanced with light-force tipping, and incisors advanced with bodily movement mechanics., Materials and Methods: Forty-three subjects (aged 9.49 ± 1.56 years) with anterior crossbite were allocated into an untreated group (control), tipping group, or bodily movement group. Lateral cephalograms were taken before advancement (T 0 ) and after obtaining normal overjet (T 1 ). Changes in labial and palatal alveolar bone thickness and height surrounding maxillary incisors were evaluated with limited field-of-view cone-beam computed tomography before advancement (CT 0 ) and 4 months after normal overjet was obtained (CT 1 ). Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank and Kruskal-Wallis one-way ANOVA tests were used to compare changes within and between groups, as appropriate. The significance level was set at .05., Results: Labial alveolar bone thickness at the midroot and apical levels were significantly decreased in the bodily movement group ( P < .05). However, between groups, there was no statistically significant difference in labial bone thickness changes at any level. Palatal and total alveolar bone thickness at the midroot and apical levels were significantly decreased in the tipping group compared with the control and bodily movement groups ( P < .05). Neither labial nor palatal bone height changes were significantly different among groups., Conclusions: Maxillary incisor advancement with light-force tipping and bodily movement in growing patients resulted in labial alveolar bone thickness and labial and palatal alveolar bone height changes that were similar to the untreated group.

Objective: To evaluate the precision and reproducibility of a protocol to perform rapid voxel-based superimposition of the mandible in growing patients using CBCT., Materials and Methods: The sample comprised two cone-beam computed tomography scans taken at least 1 year apart from each of 24 growing patients. Voxel-based superimposition was performed by two examiners independently. The internal part of the symphysis extending to the first molar was used as the reference. The superimposition process took approximately 5 minutes. Once the mandibles were superimposed, surface models were created and root mean square (RMS) changes were obtained by means of iterative closest point. To evaluate precision, differences in three areas were measured between time point 1 (T1) and time point 2 (T2) superimposed. To evaluate reproducibility between different examiners, the distances between T2 superimposed by each operator were measured in five different areas. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the precision of the superimposition and the interexaminer reproducibility measurements for each case were reported individually., Results: The superimposition mean error between T1 and T2 for the right and left sides of the mandible and chin were 0.23 mm, 0.25 mm, and 0.33 mm, respectively. Interexaminer reproducibility error was ≤0.3 mm in 20 of 24 cases for measurements near the registration area. In the ramus area, two cases had errors >1 mm (1 mm-1.3 mm)., Conclusion: The rapid superimposition was precise for assessing dentoalveolar changes and structures close to the registration area. However, evaluation of the condyles and ramus area had limitations and needs improvement.

Objective: To examine the orthodontic patient experience having braces compared with Invisalign by means of a large-scale Twitter sentiment analysis., Materials and Methods: A custom data collection program was created that collected tweets containing the words "braces" or "Invisalign" for a period of 5 months. A hierarchal Naïve Bayes sentiment analysis classifier was developed to sort the tweets into five categories: positive, negative, neutral, advertisement, or not applicable. Each category was then analyzed for specific content., Results: A total of 419,363 tweets applicable to orthodontics were collected. Users posted significantly more positive tweets (61%) than they did negative tweets (39%; P ≤ .0001). There was no significant difference in the distribution of positive and negative sentiment between braces and Invisalign tweets (P = .4189). Positive orthodontics-related tweets often highlighted gratitude for a great smile accompanied with selfies. Negative orthodontic tweets frequently focused on pain., Conclusion: Twitter users expressed more positive than negative sentiment about orthodontic treatment with no significant difference in sentiment between braces and Invisalign tweets.

Objective: To investigate differences in case selection, treatment management, and aligner treatment expertise between orthodontists and general practitioners., Materials and Methods: A parallel pair of original surveys with three sections (case selection, treatment management, and demographics) was sent to orthodontists (N = 1000) and general dentists (N = 1000) who were providers of aligner treatment., Results: Orthodontists had treated significantly more patients with aligners, had treated more patients with aligners in the previous 12 months, and had received more aligner training than general dentists (P < .0001). In general, case confidence increased with increasing experience for both orthodontists and general dentists. After adjusting for experience, there was a significant difference in aligner case confidence between orthodontists and general dentists for several malocclusions. General dentists were more confident than orthodontists in treating deep bite, severe crowding, and Class II malocclusions with aligners (P ≤ .0001). Significant differences were also found for all treatment management techniques except interproximal reduction., Conclusion: There was a significant difference in case selection, treatment management, and aligner expertise between orthodontists and general dentists, although the differences in case selection were small. Overall, it was shown that orthodontists and general dentists elected to treat a variety of moderate to severe malocclusions with aligners but with different utilization of recommended auxiliaries, perhaps demonstrating a difference in treatment goals.

Objective: To determine whether orthodontic treatment with removable aligners vs fixed orthodontic appliances is associated with a different frequency of orthodontically induced external apical root resorption (OIEARR) when genetic, radiographic, and clinical factors are accounted for., Materials and Methods: Three hundred seventy-two orthodontic patients treated with removable aligners (Invisalign) or fixed appliances were genetically screened for interleukin 1B gene (IL1B) (rs1143634), interleukin 1 receptor antagonist gene (IL1RN) (rs419598), and osteopontin gene (SPP1) (rs9138/rs11730582). Twelve clinical variables, potentially associated with OIEARR, were also considered. Subjects were divided according to the presence of radiographically determined OIEARR (>2 mm). The association between OIEARR and appliance type, and radiographic, clinical and genetic factors, was assessed using backward stepwise conditional logistic regression. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported., Results: Reliability of the methods was adequate. Clinical case complexity (American Board of Orthodontics [ABO] Discrepancy Index) (OR: 1.032; 95% CI: 1.005-1.061; P = .021) and extent of incisor apical displacement in the sagittal plane (OR: 1.478; 95% CI: 1.285-1.699; P = .001) were associated with an increased OIEARR risk. After adjusting for associations between clinical/radiographic/genetic factors, there were no statistically significant differences with respect to OIEARR or type of orthodontic appliance used, whether removable aligners or fixed appliances (OR: 1.662; 95% CI: 0.945-2.924; P = .078). Only subjects homozygous for the T allele of IL1RN (rs419598) were more prone to OIEARR during orthodontic treatment (OR: 3.121; CI: 1.93-5.03; P < .001)., Conclusions: A similar OIEARR predisposition was identified using either removable aligners (Invisalign) or fixed appliances.

Objective: To investigate American and Canadian orthodontists' opinions and perceptions on the use of headgear in the treatment of Class II malocclusions., Materials and Methods: An online survey was sent to randomly chosen orthodontists (n  =  1000)., Results: The study was completed by 948 orthodontists; 62% of the orthodontists indicated that they were using headgear in their practice. Those who were not using the appliance (38%) reported that this was mainly due to the availability of better Class II correctors in the market and lack of patient compliance. Of those who use headgear, 24% indicated that the emphasis on headgear use during their residency was an influential aspect of their decision making (P < .05). Nearly a quarter of those who do not use headgear reported that learning about other Class II correctors through continuing education courses was an important factor (P < .05). There was no difference between the headgear users and nonusers in the year and location of practice. Compared with previous studies, this study showed a decline in the use of headgear among orthodontists., Conclusions: Despite a decline, more than half of the orthodontists (62%) believe headgear is a viable treatment. Availability of Class II correctors in the market and familiarity with these appliances though continuing education courses are the reasons for the remaining 38% of orthodontists to abandon use of the headgear.

Objective: To evaluate similarities and differences in orthodontists' and general dentists' perceptions regarding their interdisciplinary communication., Materials and Methods: Orthodontists (N  =  137) and general dentists (N  =  144) throughout the United States responded to an invitation to participate in a Web-based and mailed survey, respectively., Results: The results indicated that orthodontists communicated with general dentists using the type of media general dentists preferred to use. As treatment complexity increased, orthodontists shifted from one-way forms of communication (letters) to two-way forms of communication (phone calls; P < .05). Both orthodontists and general dentists reported that orthodontists' communication regarding white spot lesions was inadequate. When treating patients with missing or malformed teeth, orthodontists reported that they sought input from the general dentists at a higher rate than the general dentists reported (P < .005)., Conclusions: Orthodontists' and general dentists' perceptions of how often specific types of media were used for interdisciplinary communication were generally similar. They differed, however, with regard to how adequately orthodontists communicated with general dentists and how often orthodontists sought input from general dentists. The methods and extent of communication between orthodontists and general dentists need to be determined on a patient-by-patient basis.

Objective: To (1) assess orthodontic patient and practitioner use of and preferences for social media and (2) investigate the potential benefit of social media in marketing and communication strategies in orthodontic practices., Materials and Methods: A survey was developed and randomly distributed to orthodontists via the American Association of Orthodontists and to patients/parents via private practices throughout the United States. Participants were asked to answer questions related to their use of social media and their perceptions of the use of social media in the orthodontic practice., Results: Of the participants, 76% of orthodontists and 89% of patients/parents use social media. Furthermore, Facebook was the social media platform that was most preferred. Social media use was more common in female and younger adult participants. Orthodontists posted information more often in the morning (40%) and afternoon (56%), and patients/parents used social media mainly in the evening (76%). The most commonly used marketing strategies in the orthodontic practices were social media (76%) and a practice website (59%). Social media and practice websites were positively related with new patient starts (P  =  .0376, P  =  .0035, respectively)., Conclusions: Most orthodontists and patients/parents used social media. Social media may be an effective marketing and communication tool in an orthodontic practice.

Objective: To determine if interproximal reduction of teeth (IPR) is perceived differently by orthodontists and general dentists., Materials and Methods: A Web-based survey containing statements about IPR was developed and randomly distributed to orthodontists and general dentists., Results: The majority of orthodontists and general dentists strongly agreed that IPR is a minimally invasive procedure that poses little risk for the development of interproximal decay. However, general dentists were more likely to perform post-IPR polishing and to apply topical fluoride than are orthodontists (P < .0001). A greater percentage of orthodontists strongly believed that the esthetic and occlusal benefits of IPR outweigh the potential risk of tooth decay when IPR was performed (P < .0001). A greater percentage of general dentists were hesitant to perform IPR, despite research supporting that IPR has little negative effect on the health of teeth., Conclusions: The results of this study disproved the null hypothesis that orthodontists and general dentists share similar views regarding the use of IPR during orthodontic treatment. General dentists were more conservative in their views of IPR and were less comfortable with performing IPR as a routine procedure. General dentists felt more strongly about the importance of post-IPR polishing and application of topical fluoride. Orthodontists were more likely to have researched the long-term effects of IPR on the health of teeth and therefore felt more comfortable performing IPR during orthodontic treatment.

Objective: To evaluate parents' preferences regarding the appearance and attire of orthodontists., Materials and Methods: Parents attending their child's first orthodontic appointment were asked to choose from among sets of photographs of potential orthodontic providers. Selected factors were varied within the sets, including sex and age of the provider as well as attire (casual, formal, white coat, or scrubs), hairstyle (loose or tied back for women, facial hair or clean shaven for men), and presence of a nametag., Results: A total of 77 parents participated. There were significant differences in choice of provider in terms of the provider's sex (P<.0001), age (P=.0013), dress (P<.0001), hair (P<.0001), and nametag (P=.0065). There were no significant differences in preference attributable to parent characteristics (P>.05)., Conclusion: Parents of orthodontic patients demonstrated clear preferences for choosing a provider related to factors that are not within the control of the practitioner (sex and age) as well as factors that can be changed by the practitioner (attire, hairstyle, and wearing a nametag).

Objective: To determine if text message reminders regarding oral hygiene compliance have an influence on the level of compliance within an orthodontic population., Materials and Methods: In this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial, 42 orthodontic patients were assigned to a text message or control group. Parents of patients assigned to the text message group received a reminder text message one weekday each week. Oral hygiene compliance was measured using bleeding index (BI), modified gingival index (MGI), and plaque index (PI), and visual examination of white spot lesion (WSL) development at baseline (T0), two appointments after baseline (T1), and four appointments after baseline (T2)., Results: BI, MGI, and PI scores were significantly lower in the text message group than in the control group at T2., Conclusion: A text message reminder system is effective for improving oral hygiene compliance in orthodontic patients.

Objective: To test the null hypothesis that orthodontist characteristics and factors related to retainer choice do not influence the management of the retention phase with regard to frequency and duration of follow-up care provided., Materials and Methods: Orthodontists (n  =  1000) were randomly selected to participate in an online survey divided into three categories: background, retainer choice, and time management., Results: Of the 1000 selected participants, 894 responded. When deciding the type of retainer to use, the following were considered most frequently: pretreatment malocclusion (91%), patient compliance (87%), patient oral hygiene (84%), and patients' desires (81%). Orthodontists who considered the presence of third molars (P  =  .03) or "special needs" patients (P  =  .02) had significantly more follow-up visits than those who did not. When vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) were prescribed, there were significantly fewer visits (P  =  .02) compared to when other types of retainers were used. As practitioner experience increased, so did the number of visits (P < .0001). Orthodontists who considered the primary responsibility of retention to fall on the patient had significantly fewer follow-up visits (P < .0001) than those who considered it either a joint or orthodontist-only responsibility., Conclusions: The null hypothesis was rejected because the number of follow-up visits during the retention phase was affected by practitioner experience, whether VFRs were used, whether the orthodontist considered the presence of third molars or special-needs patients when choosing the type of retainer, and to whom the orthodontist attributed responsibility during the retention phase.

Objective: To evaluate and compare, retrospectively, the skeletal and dental effects of mandibular symphyseal distraction osteogenesis (MSDO) achieved through the use of tooth-borne versus hybrid distractors., Materials and Methods: Pretreatment (T1), predistraction (T2), postdistraction (T3), and posttreatment (T4) orthodontic records were collected and analyzed for 47 patients (20 tooth-borne, 27 hybrid). At each time point, records included intraoral photographs, study models, postero-anterior cephalometric radiographs, and lateral cephalometric radiographs. Submental vertex radiographs were taken at T2, T3, and T4. Changes in a total of 18 measurements were analyzed to compare patients undergoing tooth-borne versus hybrid distraction., Results: The cumulative effects of orthodontics and MSDO produced similar gains in measured arch widths, with a decreased irregularity index in both groups (P > .05). However, there were differences in the timing during which the expansion was achieved. The hybrid distractor group gained space during the distraction phase of treatment. The tooth-borne group showed greater gains during pre- and postdistraction orthodontics. Comparisons of intercanine and interbone marker widths demonstrated a more parallel separation of bone during distraction with the hybrid distractor (P < .001). Distraction with the tooth-borne distractor was disproportionate, with greater separation of the canines in alveolar bone than of the bone markers in basal bone. During postdistraction orthodontics, the tooth-borne distractor group showed statistically greater increases in measurements., Conclusion: Both skeletal and dental expansion was achieved with both appliances. Greater skeletal expansion was achieved with a hybrid distractor. Greater dental expansion was achieved with a tooth-borne distractor.

Objective: To determine if there are significant clinical differences between self-ligating brackets (SLB) and conventional brackets (CB) during orthodontic treatment, as perceived by orthodontists., Materials and Methods: A survey was developed and distributed to evaluate how SLB compare to CB in terms of orthodontists' perceptions (n  =  430)., Results: SLB were preferred during the initial stage of treatment based on the shorter adjustment appointments and faster initial treatment progress they provided (P < .0001). On the other hand, practitioners preferred CB during the finishing and detailing stages of treatment (P < .0001). CB were also preferred over SLB because they were cheaper and resulted in fewer emergency appointments., Conclusions: The orthodontists' preference was significantly influenced by (1) the proportion of patients treated with SLB (P < .0001), (2) the number of cases it took them to become accustomed to SLB (P < .0001), and (3) the average appointment intervals associated with SLB (P < .0001).

Objectives: To compare attitudes of orthodontists, periodontists, and general dentists regarding the use of soft tissue lasers by orthodontists during the course of orthodontic treatment., Materials and Methods: An analogous survey was developed to evaluate and compare the current opinions of a representative sample (n  =  538) of orthodontists (61.3%), periodontists (24.3%), and general dentists (14.3%) regarding orthodontists' use of soft tissue lasers., Results: The majority (84%) of orthodontists, periodontists, and general dentists regarded the use of a soft tissue laser by orthodontists as appropriate. When compared to orthodontists and general dentists, a lower percentage of periodontists indicated that soft tissue laser use by orthodontists was appropriate (P < .01). For each of the eight specific soft tissue laser procedures investigated, periodontists reported a significantly lower level of appropriateness than did orthodontists and general dentists (P < .01). Around 75% of the total sample believed that referral would not be affected by the use of soft tissue lasers by orthodontists., Conclusions: Orthodontists, periodontists, and general dentists differed in their opinions of the perceived appropriateness of soft tissue laser use by orthodontists, with periodontists reporting a lower level of appropriateness. Clinicians need to communicate effectively to ensure that orthodontic patients in need of adjunctive soft tissue surgery are treated to the accepted standard of care.

Objective: To determine the prevalence of white spot lesions (WSLs) in orthodontic patients at 6 and 12 months into treatment using the visual examination method., Materials and Methods: Patients 6 and 12 months into treatment were examined for the presence of WSLs. The control group consisted of patients who were examined for WSLs immediately after bonding. Upon clinical evaluation, teeth were given a visual score based on the extent of demineralization., Results: The percentages of individuals having at least one WSL were 38%, 46%, and 11% for the 6-month, 12-month, and control groups, respectively. The 6-month (P  =  .021) and 12-month groups (P  =  .005) were significantly different from the control group but were not significantly different from each other (P  =  .50). Of subjects in the study who had at least one visible WSL, 76% were males and 24% were females (P  =  .009)., Conclusions: This clinical study showed a sharp increase in the number of WSLs during the first 6 months of treatment that continued to rise at a slower rate to 12 months. Clinicians should evaluate the oral hygiene status of patients during the initial months of treatment and, if necessary, should implement extra measures to prevent demineralization.

Objective: To examine the gender differences in managing practice and staff members in orthodontic practices., Materials and Methods: All orthodontists in Virginia and Maryland (n = 427) were surveyed and demographic information was collected. For the crude analyses of the data, a Fisher's exact test or chi(2) test was performed. For the adjusted analyses, genders were compared using a logistic regression or analysis of covariance. The covariates were adjusted for age, program length, years in practice, number of years since graduation, and practice state., Results: The length of the residency program attended did not differ with gender. No gender differences in practice ownership or creating the practice were observed. There was a significant gender difference in implementation of performance reviews: female orthodontists were more likely to provide performance reviews and tended to accept more poor reviews before staff termination than male orthodontists. However, when provided, no gender difference was observed in the number of performance reviews., Conclusion: Gender has a significant impact on the implementation of performance reviews in practices. Practice ownership status was not influenced by providers' gender.

Objective: To develop a novel delivery system by which fluoride incorporated into elastomeric rings, such as those used to ligate orthodontic wires, will be released in a controlled and constant manner., Materials and Methods: Polyethylene co-vinyl acetate (PEVA) was used as the model elastomer. Samples (N = 3) were prepared by incorporating 0.02 to 0.4 g of sodium fluoride (NaF) into previously prepared PEVA solution. Another group of samples prepared in the same manner were additionally dip-coated in PEVA to create an overcoat. Fluoride release studies were conducted in vitro using an ion selective electrode over a period of 45 days. The amount of fluoride released was compared to the optimal therapeutic dose of 0.7 microg F(-)/ring/d., Results: Only coated samples with the highest fluoride content (group D, 0.4 g of NaF) were able to release fluoride at therapeutic levels. When fluoride release from coated and uncoated samples with the same amount of NaF were compared, it was shown that the dip-coating technique resulted in a fluoride release in a controlled manner while eliminating the initial burst effect., Conclusions: This novel fluoride delivery matrix provided fluoride release at a therapeutically effective rate and profile.

Objective: To discern patients' opinions regarding responsibility for orthodontic retention and to determine whether patient attitudes toward retention are related to perceptions of treatment success., Materials and Methods: Questionnaires regarding orthodontic retention were distributed to first-year undergraduate college students (n = 158), first-year dental students (n = 183), and retention patients at orthodontic offices (n = 214). Items included treatment satisfaction, perceived responsibility for retention, type of retainer prescribed, reasons for discontinuing use of retainers, and relapse experienced., Results: Four hundred twenty-eight of 555 participants indicated that they had received orthodontic treatment. Most indicated they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their teeth, both at the end of treatment (96%) and currently (84%). There was a strong relationship between the perception of stability of tooth position and current satisfaction level (P < .0001). Most individuals (88%) indicated that they themselves were responsible for maintaining the alignment and fit of their teeth. Those who indicated that someone else was responsible were nearly twice as likely to be dissatisfied with their teeth (P = .0496). Patients who had been prescribed clear, invisible retainers were significantly more likely to be "very satisfied" currently (50%) compared to those with Hawley (35%) or permanently bonded (36%) retainers (P = .0002). Patients with Hawley retainers were significantly less likely to be wearing them currently as prescribed (45%) than those with invisible (65%) or bonded (68%) retainers (P < .0001)., Conclusions: Satisfaction with orthodontic results after treatment is related to patient perceptions of responsibility for retention and perceived stability of tooth position. Patients should play a contributory role in formulating orthodontic retention plans.

Objective: To compare the opinions of Swedish orthodontists and American orthodontists regarding the association between third molar eruption and dental crowding., Materials and Methods: A survey was distributed to Swedish orthodontists (n = 230) asking their views on the force exerted by erupting third molars, its relationship to crowding, and their recommendations for prophylactic removal. Results were compared with those from a similar study conducted in the United States. Chi square analysis was used to determine differences in responses to questions between Swedish and American orthodontists. P < or = .05 was considered significant., Results: Both Swedish and American orthodontists believed that lower third molars were more likely than upper third molars to cause force (65% and 58% for Swedish and American orthodontists, respectively) and crowding (42% and 40%, respectively). No statistically significant differences were seen between the answers of American and Swedish orthodontists regarding the role of upper and lower third molars in causing crowding. Although only 18% of Swedish orthodontists "generally" or "sometimes" recommended prophylactic removal of mandibular third molars, 36% of American orthodontists "generally" or "sometimes" recommended removal (P < .0001)., Conclusions: Most orthodontists in the United States and Sweden do believe that erupting lower third molars exert an anterior force; however, they also believe that these teeth "rarely" or "never" cause crowding of the dentition. The reason that more American orthodontists recommend prophylactic removal of mandibular third molars remains unexplained.

Objective: To test the null hypothesis that the financial status of a patient's orthodontic contract and other patient and appointment characteristics have no influence on appointment attendance., Materials and Methods: During a 6-week period, the last appointment of each active, non-Medicaid patient (n = 538) was recorded as either kept or missed. The financial status of the patient's contract, age, sex, method by which the appointment was made, and the type of appointment scheduled were recorded. Associations between each of these factors and appointment attendance were evaluated using chi(2) analysis. In the case of patients who missed their appointment, attendance at the subsequent reappointment was also evaluated., Results: The overall appointment failure rate was 12.3%. Males (16.2%) were significantly more likely than females (9.5%) to miss appointments (P = .02). Also, appointments made by postcard (28.2%) were more likely to be missed than those made in person (11.8%) or by phone (6.5%) (P = .003). The most significant factor affecting appointment attendance was the patient's financial status (P = .0001). Patients with accounts that were overdue (33.3%) or in collections (28.6%) were more likely to miss appointments than those whose accounts were current (10.5%). Of patients who missed their appointment (n = 66), 30% also missed the subsequent reappointment., Conclusions: The null hypothesis was rejected. Patients with delinquent financial accounts were three times as likely to miss an orthodontic appointment as those whose contracts were current. Increased rates of missed orthodontic appointments were also found for males, patients scheduled by mailing a postcard, and patients who had missed their previous appointment.

Objective: To determine whether there are differences in self-awareness and perception of an individual's own profile among various groups., Materials and Methods: Laypeople, orthodontic patients, and first (D1) and third-year dental (D3) students were surveyed (n = 75 each). The participants answered a questionnaire regarding how they felt about their own profile and teeth. They also chose from among various silhouettes the one that most resembled their own profile. Profile photos of participants were analyzed by two orthodontists who matched the individual to the depicted silhouettes. Agreement between participants and experts was evaluated using the Kappa statistic. Differences among groups in identifying their own profiles and differences among profile types in satisfaction with their appearance were compared using chi2., Results: Overall agreement between the individuals' perceptions of their own profiles and evaluation by orthodontists was 53% (kappa = .15). The four groups were different in their ability to recognize their own profile (P < .05). D3s were most accurate (64%, kappa = .28), followed by D1s (57%, kappa = .10), orthodontic patients (48%, kappa = .19), and laypeople (43%, kappa = .04). Individuals who considered themselves as having a Class II or III profile were less satisfied with the appearance of their profiles (P < .05). Those who considered themselves as having a Class III profile were also less happy with the appearance of their teeth (P < .05)., Conclusions: This study suggests that about half the population cannot characterize their own profile. However, subjects who perceived their own profiles as being different from average were more likely to be unhappy with their facial appearance.

Objective: To determine the effect of media advertising on consumer perception of orthodontic treatment quality., Materials and Methods: A survey instrument was designed to evaluate factors influencing consumer selection of an orthodontist and consumer perception of different forms of media advertising (radio, television, newspaper, magazine, direct mail, and billboard) by orthodontic practices. The surveys were distributed by eight orthodontic offices in and around the Richmond, Virginia area. The survey return rate was 97%., Results: Respondents most often cited dentist and patient referrals as how they learned of the orthodontic practices they visited (50% to 57%). A caring attitude and good practitioner reputation were the top reasons influencing actual selection of an orthodontist (53% and 49%, respectively). Of respondents, 14% to 24% felt that advertising orthodontists would offer a lower quality of care than nonadvertising orthodontists. Newspaper, magazine, and direct mail advertisements were viewed more favorably than radio, television, and billboard advertisements. Chi-square analyses revealed few statistically significant differences in perception between different income and education groups., Conclusions: The majority of patients do not perceive advertising to reflect poorly on the quality of orthodontic care. However, patients with different income and education levels perceive media advertising differently.

Objective: To test the null hypothesis that adding Listerine mouthrinse to the standard oral hygiene regimen has no added benefit for orthodontic patients in maintaining proper oral health., Materials and Methods: Patients within their first 6 months of orthodontic treatment were assigned either to the brushing + flossing (N = 25) or brushing + flossing + Listerine (N = 25) group. Initially, all of the participants received a prophylaxis and instructions on how to brush and floss. Measurements were recorded for the bleeding, gingival, and plaque indices (BI, MGI, and PI, respectively) that provided baseline values (T1). Subsequent measurements were taken at 3 months (T2) and 6 months (T3). Mean BI, MGI, and PI at T1, T2, and T3 were compared statistically between the groups using repeated measures analysis of variance. The significance level was set at P < or = .05., Results: The response profiles for the BI, MGI, and PI over time were significantly different between the two groups. Patients who had Listerine in their daily oral hygiene regimen exhibited significantly lower scores for all three indices at T2 and T3 than the patients who only brushed and flossed., Conclusions: The hypothesis is rejected. This study shows that use of Listerine mouthrinse can reduce the amount of plaque and gingivitis in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Adding Listerine to the standard oral hygiene regimen may be beneficial for orthodontic patients in maintaining proper oral health, thus reducing the likelihood that white spot lesions and gingivitis will develop.

When a dentist replants an avulsed tooth, the repair process sometimes results in the cementum of the root and the alveolar bone fusing together, with the replanted tooth becoming ankylosed. When this occurs, the usual process of tooth movement with bone deposition and bone resorption at the periodontium cannot function. If dental ankylosis occurs in the maxillary incisor of a growing child, the ankylosed tooth also cannot move vertically with the subsequent vertical growth of the alveolar process. This results in the ankylosed tooth leaving the plane of occlusion and often becoming esthetically objectionable. This report describes a 12-year-old female with a central incisor that was replanted 5 years earlier, became ankylosed, and left the occlusal plane following subsequent normal vertical growth of the alveolar process. When growth was judged near completion, the tooth was moved back to the occlusal plane using a combination of orthodontics, surgical block osteotomy, and distraction osteogenesis to reposition the tooth at the proper vertical position in the arch. This approach had the advantage of bringing both the incisal edge and the gingival margin of the clinical crown to the proper height in the arch relative to their antimeres. Previous treatment procedures for ankylosed teeth have often involved the extraction of the affected tooth. When this is done, a vertical defect in the alveolar process results that often requires additional bone surgery to reconstruct the vertical height of the alveolar process. If the tooth is then replaced, the replacement tooth must reach from the final occlusal plane to the deficient ridge. This results in an excessively long clinical crown with a gingival height that does not match the adjacent teeth.

Flared incisors and deep overbite are challenging to treat orthodontically. This paper describes the use of a three-piece base arch and Class I elastics to correct deep overbite while simultaneously closing spaces. An analysis of the biomechanics and a discussion of the appliance design are presented to help understand how the incisor axial inclination can be corrected and controlled during orthodontic therapy. A clinical example illustrates the treatment sequence.

Current concepts of clinical orthodontic tooth movement are misleading. Traditionally, these have been described as dependent on force levels and being tipping/bodily in nature. The following is a reevaluation of the relationships between tooth movement and orthodontic mechanotherapy not usually considered when analyzing tooth movement clinically. It is our contention that confusion as to the biological response(s) to mechanical force is derived from in vivo orthodontic trials where conditions are undefined. This correlates with variable biological responses within the periodontium. Constantly changing moment to force ratios inherent to the dynamic load deflection rates of any system used to move a tooth cause changing tendencies for crown/root tipping. This implies that the accepted notion of static translatory tooth movement, although a useful didactic concept, is currently unattainable. In actuality, it has never been documented empirically using any conventional orthodontic appliance.