Literature DB >> 20122426

Effectiveness of interceptive orthodontic treatment in reducing malocclusions.

Gregory J King1, Pongsri Brudvik.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective cohort study of the effectiveness of interceptive orthodontic treatment, we compared patients receiving interceptive orthodontic treatment with untreated control subjects.
METHODS: Models were scored by using the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON). Control models (n = 113) were archival and were selected based on malocclusion in the early mixed dentition and no orthodontic treatment during the subsequent 2 years. The patients (n = 133) were in the mixed dentition and consecutively treated in the University of Bergen orthodontic clinic. Initial ages were 9.4 years (+ or - 1.4) for the treated group and 9.3 years (+ or - 0.8) for the control group. The treatment took a mean of 27.2 months (+ or - 16.3) for the patients; the control group was observed for a mean of 24.4 months (+ or - 3.6). Subject Groups were matched for age, need, complexity, duration, and all ICON components except spacing (P <0.006) and crossbite (P <0.000).
RESULTS: ICON scores decreased after treatment by 38.8% (P <0.0001) from 54.9 (+ or - 16.6) to 33.6 (+ or - 16.1). The controls were unchanged, with ICON scores of 54.0 (+ or - 14.8) and 54.2 (+ or - 16.9). Improvement grades were different (P <0.0001), with most controls categorized as "not improved or worse" (89.4%), whereas only 36.1% of the treated group were in that category. However, there were increases in the "minimal," "moderate," and "substantial" improvement categories for the treated subjects (22.6%, 21.1%, and 17.3%, respectively). The controls did not change in any ICON component and worsened in crowding (P <0.007), whereas the patients improved in esthetics, crowding, crossbite, and overbite (P <0.007).
CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that interceptive orthodontic treatment is effective for improving malocclusion but does not produce finished-quality results. Copyright 2010 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20122426     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.02.023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  3 in total

Review 1.  Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical exposure, in children aged 9 to 14 years.

Authors:  Philip E Benson; Amarpreet Atwal; Farhan Bazargani; Nicola Parkin; Bikram Thind
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-12-30

2.  Perspectives of Indonesian Orthodontists on the Ideal Orthodontic Treatment Time.

Authors:  Talat Hasan Al-Gunaid; Rafinus Arifin; Ida Bagus Narmada; Krisnawati E Tarman
Journal:  Clin Cosmet Investig Dent       Date:  2020-09-10

3.  Temporary Anchorage Device: An Epitome of Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment.

Authors:  Preeth Shetty; Us Krishna Nayak; Amitha M Hegde; Mary Jacob
Journal:  Int J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2010-04-15
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.