Search

Background: Preformed elastodontic appliances (EAs) have been described as safe, cost-effective, and easy-to-use devices for interceptive orthodontic treatment in growing patients. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and the attitude of dentists toward the use of EAs and to compare the behaviors of orthodontists (Os) with those of general dental practitioners (GDPs). Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed among dentists through social media. Twenty-two items were divided as follows: characteristics of respondents; general knowledge about EAs; section for EA-users; and section for EA non-users. Chi-squared tests were used to analyze differences in responses between groups. Results: Participants included 226 Os and 168 GDPs. The majority in both groups reported having adequate knowledge about EAs and utilizing them in their practice. GDPs usually use EAs to treat children during the early phase of growth, while Os also use EAs to address orthodontic problems in different stages of dentition, experiencing a chair time reduction compared with traditional appliances. Regarding EA non-users, GDPs seem not to find an application among their patients, whereas Os reported not having enough patient compliance during treatment. Conclusions: Although treatment with EAs is common among all dentists, differences exist between Os and GDPs in the awareness and application, as well as in the reasons provided for not using EAs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientific studies have shown that dysfunctional problems associated with dysmorphisms are the base of malocclusion. The position of the mouth and the head is a component of the general postural arrangement, so any head misalignment creates disharmonies and tensions among the neck muscles. Elastodontics is a treatment based on the use of removable elastomeric devices. These functional appliances are made of elastomeric material, acting tridimensionally on a neuromuscular system with orthopaedic and dental effects. Bioactivators have a vestibular and lingual flange with a free central area that permits them to position teeth without constraints. The flanges are linked by an occlusal plane that maintains the two skeletal bases and teeth in first-class normocclusion with propulsive and retropulsive effects on the maxilla and mandible. Elastomeric devices are generally well tolerated by patients requiring simple collaboration and management. This review aim is to describe the indications and limits of orthodontic therapy with elastomeric devices to provide an overview of elastodontics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Preformed elastodontic appliances (EAs) have been described as safe, cost-effective, and easy-to-use devices for interceptive orthodontic treatment in growing patients. This study aimed to assess the knowledge and the attitude of dentists toward the use of EAs and to compare the behaviors of orthodontists (Os) with those of general dental practitioners (GDPs). Methods: An anonymous survey was distributed among dentists through social media. Twenty-two items were divided as follows: characteristics of respondents; general knowledge about EAs; section for EA-users; and section for EA non-users. Chi-squared tests were used to analyze differences in responses between groups. Results: Participants included 226 Os and 168 GDPs. The majority in both groups reported having adequate knowledge about EAs and utilizing them in their practice. GDPs usually use EAs to treat children during the early phase of growth, while Os also use EAs to address orthodontic problems in different stages of dentition, experiencing a chair time reduction compared with traditional appliances. Regarding EA non-users, GDPs seem not to find an application among their patients, whereas Os reported not having enough patient compliance during treatment. Conclusions: Although treatment with EAs is common among all dentists, differences exist between Os and GDPs in the awareness and application, as well as in the reasons provided for not using EAs.

Scientific studies have shown that dysfunctional problems associated with dysmorphisms are the base of malocclusion. The position of the mouth and the head is a component of the general postural arrangement, so any head misalignment creates disharmonies and tensions among the neck muscles. Elastodontics is a treatment based on the use of removable elastomeric devices. These functional appliances are made of elastomeric material, acting tridimensionally on a neuromuscular system with orthopaedic and dental effects. Bioactivators have a vestibular and lingual flange with a free central area that permits them to position teeth without constraints. The flanges are linked by an occlusal plane that maintains the two skeletal bases and teeth in first-class normocclusion with propulsive and retropulsive effects on the maxilla and mandible. Elastomeric devices are generally well tolerated by patients requiring simple collaboration and management. This review aim is to describe the indications and limits of orthodontic therapy with elastomeric devices to provide an overview of elastodontics.

Background: The management of a hyperdivergent growth pattern is one of the most challenging in orthodontics and different treatments are advocated. The present study analyses the effectiveness of elastodontic therapy with AMCOP® devices in treating children with hyperdivergent class II malocclusion and the effect on the upper airway patency. Methods: The study group included 21 patients (10 males and 11 females, mean age 8.22 ± 1.17 years) with a hyperdivergent growth and a class II malocclusion treated with AMCOP® devices. Cephalometric analysis was performed before treatment (T0) and after treatment (T1). Results: After treatment, the cephalometric analysis revealed a correction of the class II malocclusion and a modification of the growth pattern with a divergence reduction. The improvement of the upper airway space was also observed. Conclusion: The elastodontic therapy effectively corrected hyperdivergent class II malocclusion in growing patients over a short period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The management of a hyperdivergent growth pattern is one of the most challenging in orthodontics and different treatments are advocated. The present study analyses the effectiveness of elastodontic therapy with AMCOP® devices in treating children with hyperdivergent class II malocclusion and the effect on the upper airway patency. Methods: The study group included 21 patients (10 males and 11 females, mean age 8.22 ± 1.17 years) with a hyperdivergent growth and a class II malocclusion treated with AMCOP® devices. Cephalometric analysis was performed before treatment (T0) and after treatment (T1). Results: After treatment, the cephalometric analysis revealed a correction of the class II malocclusion and a modification of the growth pattern with a divergence reduction. The improvement of the upper airway space was also observed. Conclusion: The elastodontic therapy effectively corrected hyperdivergent class II malocclusion in growing patients over a short period.

Background: Elastodontics is a specific interceptive orthodontic treatment that uses removable elastomeric appliances. They are functional appliances that produce neuromuscular, orthopedic and dental effects. Thus, these devices are useful in the developmental age, when skeletal structures are characterized by important plasticity and adaptation capacity, allowing to remove factors responsible for malocclusions. Elastomeric devices are generally well tolerated by patients requiring simple collaboration and management. This work can be useful to update all orthodontists already adopting these appliances or for those who want to approach them for the first time. This study aimed to describe four cases treated with new elastomeric devices called AMCOP Bio-Activators and to provide an overview of elastodontics, its evolution, indications and limits., Methods: A total of four clinical cases were presented after a treatment period of 16-20 months to evaluate the clinical and radiological effects of the elastodontic therapy., Results: The effectiveness of Bio-Activators on clinical cases was evidenced with a significant improvement in skeletal and dentoalveolar relationship, and malocclusion correction in a limited treatment period (16-20 months)., Conclusions: The Bio-Activators showed clinical effectiveness to achieve therapeutic targets according to a low impact on the patient's compliance.