AIMS: To compare the mesio-distal tooth sizes and dental arch dimensions in Malay boys and girls with Class I, Class II and Class III malocclusions. METHODS: The dental casts of 150 subjects (78 boys, 72 girls), between 12 and 16 years of age, with Class I, Class II and Class III malocclusions were used. Each group consisted of 50 subjects. An electronic digital caliper was used to measure the mesio-distal tooth sizes of the upper and lower permanent teeth (first molar to first molar), the intercanine and intermolar widths. The arch lengths and arch perimeters were measured with AutoCAD software (Autodesk Inc., San Rafael, CA, U.S.A.). RESULTS: The mesio-distal dimensions of the upper lateral incisors and canines in the Class I malocclusion group were significantly smaller than the corresponding teeth in the Class III and Class II groups, respectively. The lower canines and first molars were significantly smaller in the Class I group than the corresponding teeth in the Class II group. The lower intercanine width was significantly smaller in the Class II group as compared with the Class I group, and the upper intermolar width was significantly larger in Class III group as compared with the Class II group. There were no significant differences in the arch perimeters or arch lengths. The boys had significantly wider teeth than the girls, except for the left lower second premolar. The boys also had larger upper and lower intermolar widths and lower intercanine width than the girls. CONCLUSION: Small, but statistically significant, differences in tooth sizes are not necessarily accompanied by significant arch width, arch length or arch perimeter differences. Generally, boys have wider teeth, larger lower intercanine width and upper and lower intermolar widths than girls.
AIMS: To compare the mesio-distal tooth sizes and dental arch dimensions in Malay boys and girls with Class I, Class II and Class III malocclusions. METHODS: The dental casts of 150 subjects (78 boys, 72 girls), between 12 and 16 years of age, with Class I, Class II and Class III malocclusions were used. Each group consisted of 50 subjects. An electronic digital caliper was used to measure the mesio-distal tooth sizes of the upper and lower permanent teeth (first molar to first molar), the intercanine and intermolar widths. The arch lengths and arch perimeters were measured with AutoCAD software (Autodesk Inc., San Rafael, CA, U.S.A.). RESULTS: The mesio-distal dimensions of the upper lateral incisors and canines in the Class I malocclusion group were significantly smaller than the corresponding teeth in the Class III and Class II groups, respectively. The lower canines and first molars were significantly smaller in the Class I group than the corresponding teeth in the Class II group. The lower intercanine width was significantly smaller in the Class II group as compared with the Class I group, and the upper intermolar width was significantly larger in Class III group as compared with the Class II group. There were no significant differences in the arch perimeters or arch lengths. The boys had significantly wider teeth than the girls, except for the left lower second premolar. The boys also had larger upper and lower intermolar widths and lower intercanine width than the girls. CONCLUSION: Small, but statistically significant, differences in tooth sizes are not necessarily accompanied by significant arch width, arch length or arch perimeter differences. Generally, boys have wider teeth, larger lower intercanine width and upper and lower intermolar widths than girls.