Literature DB >> 21615211

Influence of single-jaw surgery vs bimaxillary surgery on the outcome and duration of combined orthodontic-surgical treatment.

Ian Arad1, Jasveer Jandu, Paul Bassett, Padhraig S Fleming.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effects of single-jaw surgery (mandible or maxilla only) vs bimaxillary surgery on final peer assessment rating (PAR) score outcome and overall treatment duration.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Treatment records of 63 consecutively treated orthognathic patients were assessed; 41 underwent bimaxillary procedures, and the remainder single-jaw procedures. All treatment was undertaken at Kent and Canterbury Hospital in the United Kingdom. Demographic characteristics and clinical parameters, including treatment duration, number of visits required, initial and final PAR scores, and number of extractions undertaken, were recorded.
RESULTS: The mean treatment time was 30.6 months; treatment time was shortest in the maxillary procedure only group. The mean reduction in percentage PAR score was 77%, with an average final score of 9. Linear regression analysis confirmed that procedure type had no influence on final PAR score (P = .62) or on overall treatment duration after adjustment for extractions and initial PAR score as confounders (P = .47).
CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference was noted in treatment duration or in occlusal outcome between single- and double-jaw surgeries.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21615211      PMCID: PMC8903850          DOI: 10.2319/030211-150.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  12 in total

1.  Duration of orthodontic treatment involving orthognathic surgery.

Authors:  P A Dowling; L Espeland; O Krogstad; A Stenvik; A Kelly
Journal:  Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg       Date:  1999

2.  Evaluation of the peer assessment rating (PAR) index as an index of orthodontic treatment need.

Authors:  Allen R Firestone; F Michael Beck; Frank M Beglin; Katherine W l Vig
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index outcomes for orthodontic and orthognathic surgery patients.

Authors:  S Ponduri; A Pringle; H Illing; P A Brennan
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 1.651

4.  The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity.

Authors:  S Richmond; W C Shaw; K D O'Brien; I B Buchanan; R Jones; C D Stephens; C T Roberts; M Andrews
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  A national review of mandibular orthognathic surgery activity in the National Health Service in England over a nine year period: part 1--service factors.

Authors:  D R Moles; S J Cunningham
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2009-01-04       Impact factor: 1.651

6.  Prospective, multi-center study of the effectiveness of orthodontic/orthognathic surgery care in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Kevin O'Brien; Jean Wright; Frances Conboy; Priscilla Appelbe; David Bearn; Susan Caldwell; Jayne Harrison; Jamil Hussain; David Lewis; Simon Littlewood; Nicola Mandall; Tim Morris; Alison Murray; Mojtaba Oskouei; Stephen Rudge; Jonathan Sandler; Badri Thiruvenkatachari; Tanya Walsh; Elizabeth Turbill
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  The validation of the Peer Assessment Rating index for malocclusion severity and treatment difficulty.

Authors:  L DeGuzman; D Bahiraei; K W Vig; P S Vig; R J Weyant; K O'Brien
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 2.650

8.  The duration of orthodontic treatment.

Authors:  D F Fink; R J Smith
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Orthognathic cases: what are the surgical costs?

Authors:  Sanjay Kumar; Alison C Williams; Anthony J Ireland; Jonathan R Sandy
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 3.075

10.  Orthodontic preparation for orthognathic surgery: how long does it take and why? A retrospective study.

Authors:  F Luther; D O Morris; C Hart
Journal:  Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.651

View more
  4 in total

1.  Comparison of two surgical techniques (HOO vs. BSSO) for mandibular osteotomies in orthognathic surgery-a 10-year retrospective study.

Authors:  Lukas B Seifert; Christopher Langhans; Yakub Berdan; Sophie Zorn; Michelle Klos; Constantin Landes; Robert Sader
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2022-05-20

2.  Facial soft tissue changes after maxillary impaction and mandibular advancement in high angle class II cases.

Authors:  Barış Aydil; Nedim Özer; Gülnaz Marşan
Journal:  Int J Med Sci       Date:  2012-06-09       Impact factor: 3.738

3.  Assessing the outcome of orthognathic surgery by three-dimensional soft tissue analysis.

Authors:  L Vittert; S Katina; A Ayoub; B Khambay; A W Bowman
Journal:  Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 2.789

4.  Comparison of one-jaw and two-jaw orthognathic surgery in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion using data from 10 multi-centers in Korea: Part I. Demographic and skeletodental characteristics.

Authors:  Seung-Weon Lim; Minsoo Kim; Mihee Hong; Kyung-Hwa Kang; Minji Kim; Su-Jung Kim; Yoon-Ji Kim; Young Ho Kim; Sung-Hoon Lim; Sang Jin Sung; Seung-Hak Baek; Jin-Hyoung Cho
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 1.372

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.