Search

The interceptive orthodontic treatment of patients with complex dentofacial abnormalities is frequently inefficient and produces less than ideal outcomes. Therefore, postponing therapy to a single-phase surgical-orthodontic approach might be considered a reasonable option. However, other relevant aspects of the patient's quality of life, such as possible psychosocial problems and functional impairments, should also be considered before deciding whether to intercept a severe dentofacial malocclusion while the patient is still growing, or wait and treat later. This case report describes the nonsurgical treatment of a young patient with a severe Class III open-bite malocclusion associated with a cervical cystic lymphangioma. Despite the poor interceptive therapy prognosis, a 2-phase approach was effective. A reflection about giving up efficiency in favor of effectiveness, functional rehabilitation, and the patient's quality of life is included., (Copyright © 2013 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare perceptions of dental aesthetics of Class III and anterior open bite (AOB) malocclusions between 10- to 11-year-old Birmingham schoolchildren and orthodontists., Materials and Methods: Thirty-one orthodontists practicing in Birmingham (UK) and 383 school children aged 10-11 years from a random and representative sample of seven primary schools in South Birmingham participated in the study. Participants were asked to assess five anterior photographs of the dentition representing varying degrees of aesthetic impairment of Class III and AOB malocclusions. Perceptions of dental aesthetics were determined using the aesthetic component (AC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN)., Results: Perceptions of dental aesthetics were similar among males and females (P > .05). Both groups allocated the highest median AC score to the photo representing severe Class III malocclusion and the lowest to the photo representing mild Class III and AOB malocclusion. Differences in perceived dental aesthetics were significant for photos representing severe Class III and moderate AOB malocclusions, with orthodontists perceiving greater aesthetic impairment for severe Class III and schoolchildren for moderate AOB, respectively (P < .05)., Conclusions: Schoolchildren and orthodontists perceived Class III malocclusions to have greater aesthetic impairment compared to AOB malocclusions. Surprisingly, none of the median AC scores allocated to the five photos were in the "Definite need" for treatment category. The IOTN may not be sensitive to these types of malocclusions. This finding merits further investigation.