Search

Aim To investigate the outcome quality and the long-term (≥15 years) post-treatment (Tx) changes after Class II:2 Herbst-multibracket appliance (MBA) Tx. Subjects and methods In this longitudinal observational study, a recall of Class II:2 patients who had been treated by a Herbst-MBA during adolescence was conducted. Study models from before and after active Tx, after retention and after recall were assessed using standard occlusal variables and the peer assessment rating index (PAR). These data were compared to historical untreated Class I controls. Results Twenty out of 33 patients (61%) could be located and participated at age 33.9 ± 2.7 years. When comparing their data to the 13 patients who did not participate, the pre- and post-Tx occlusal findings did not differ systematically; however, the PAR scores of the non-participants were by 3.3-8.2 points higher at all times and the non-participants were 2.1-2.5 years older. Pre-Tx at age 14.4 ± 2.7 years, the participants showed the following mean values: PAR = 15.0 ± 7.0, Class II molar relationship (MR) = 0.8 ± 0.3 cusp widths (cw), overbite = 5.3 ± 1.3 mm. After Tx, a PAR score of 2.9 ± 1.3 and a super Class I MR (-0.1 ± 0.1 cw) with normal overbite (1.2 ± 0.8 mm) existed. At recall, a PAR score increase to 5.9 ± 3.6 points had occurred, mainly caused by an increase of overbite to 2.5 ± 1.5 mm. The average MR remained Class I (0.0 ± 0.2 cw). For all variables, the untreated controls exhibited similar findings. Conclusion The occlusal outcome of Class II:2 Herbst-MBA Tx exhibited very good long-term stability. While mild post-Tx changes occurred, the long-term findings are similar to untreated Class I controls.

Aim To investigate the long-term (≥15 years) post-treatment (Tx) occlusal changes and outcome quality after Class II:1 Tx. Subjects and Methods Herbst-MBA Tx had been performed at age 12.8 ± 2.7 years in 119 patients. A recall was conducted and study models from before and after active Tx, after retention as well as after recall were evaluated using standard occlusal variables and the PAR index. These data were compared to 31 untreated Class I controls. Results 52 out of 119 patients could be located and participated at 33.6 ± 3.1 years. Compared to the 67 patients who did not participate in the recall, the pre- and post-Tx occlusal data of the participants did not differ systematically; however, the PAR scores were higher by 3.0-4.7 points at all times. Pre-Tx, the mean values of the 52 participants were: PAR = 27.2 ± 7.6, Class II molar relationship (MR) = 0.7 cusp widths (cw), overjet = 8.2 mm, overbite = 4.1 mm. After Tx, the PAR score was 3.4 ± 2.2. A Class I MR (0.0 ± 0.1 cw) with normal overjet (2.3 ± 0.7 mm) and overbite (1.3 ± 0.7 mm) existed. At recall, a mild PAR score increase to 8.2 ± 5.5 points had occurred; this was mainly due to increased overjet and overbite values (3.6 ± 1.1 and 2.8 ± 1.6 mm) while the MR was stable (0.0 ± 0.2 cw). For all these variables, similar findings were made in the untreated controls. Conclusion The occlusal outcome of Class II:1 Tx showed very good long-term stability. While mild changes occur post-Tx, the long-term result is similar to untreated Class I controls.

The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of orthodontic care in one municipal health center.The material consisted of one age-cohort of 15-16 year-old adolescents (n = 67). Of them, 97% participated in a clinical examination. The final group included in the study consisted of 61 adolescents (91% of the whole age cohort). The occlusions were evaluated applying the Occlusal Morphology and Function Index (OMFI), the Dental Health Component (DHC) and the Aesthetic Component (AC) of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN). Moreover, all adolescents filled in a semi-structured questionnaire enquiring about their satisfaction with the function and appearance of their own dentition and self-perceived orthodontic treatment need. They also scored their own dental appearance on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS).Of the adolescents, 42% had received orthodontic treatment, while 58% were untreated. All morphological criteria of the OMFI were met by 58% of orthodontically treated and 49% of untreated adolescents and all functional criteria by 67% and 57%, respectively. Treatment need was registered in two of the treated adolescents (7%) and five of the untreated adolescents (14%). Treated adolescents were more often satisfied with their dental appearance than untreated adolescents (p = 0.034). In both groups, satisfaction with the function was high (93%).Orthodontic treatment seems to improve both occlusal morphology and function. The high satisfaction with one's own dental appearance among the treated adolescents is worth noting.

The purpose of the Investigation was to determine the need of orthodontic treatment in 7-year-old Finnish children. The series consisted of 200 Finnish children, 100 girls and 100 boys. With regard to the main lines of occlusion a close agreement was observed between I the prevalence of malocclusion in this and other Scandinavian series. The need of orthodontic treatment was assessed using a treatment scale for the age group concerned. No treatment was required in 42% of the children, while 23.5% were in immediate need of orthodontic treatment. In 34.5% it was considered necessary to follow the occlusal development.

200 children selected at random, were examined at the ages of 7, 10, 12 and 15. The reliability of the orthodontic diagnosis made at the age of 7 was tested at different ages. In severe cases judged to be in need of corrective treatment at the age of 7, the need persisted. Of 69 children in need of observation at the age of 7, 66.7 per cent were in need of treatment or had already been treated by the age of 15. Of those children who were not in need of any orthodontic treatment at the age of 7, every third was in need of treatment or had been treated by the age of 15. Considerable changes in the occlusion took place between the ages of 7 and 15. Most misjudgements were made about dental arch crowding. At the age of ten the orthodontic condition could be seen more clearly. Surprising changes in crowding for example, retained cuspids and the development of scissors-bite, occurred even after the age of 12. Repeated orthodontic check-ups are required between the ages of 7 and 15 to evaluate the real requirements for treatment. The total need for orthodontic treatment in an age cohort was high (23–46 per cent). An index to rank the cases in need of orthodontic treatment according to severity of malocclusion is an administrative necessity.