Literature DB >> 32241361

The effect of digital diagnostic setups on orthodontic treatment planning.

Derek Hou1, Raquel Capote2, Burcu Bayirli2, Daniel C N Chan3, Greg Huang4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate whether viewing digital treatment simulations influenced orthodontic treatment planning decisions or practitioners' confidence in their selected plans.
METHODS: Records of 6 patients representing different case types (eg, missing teeth, crowding, sagittal discrepancies) were collected. A total of 22 orthodontists and 7 orthodontic residents viewed these records and formulated treatment plans for each case, indicating their most recommended plan and up to 2 alternative plans. After treatment planning each case, digital setups of each treatment plan indicated by the practitioner were shown. The practitioners were then asked if they still recommended their original plan, or if they would now recommend a different plan. Their confidence levels in the success of their plans were recorded before and after viewing the setups.
RESULTS: After viewing the digital setups, there was a significant change in the treatment plan for 9.2% of the cases. These included modifications like changing the extraction pattern or proposing space closure rather than opening space for an implant. In an additional 14.4% of the cases, treatment plans underwent partial changes, like adding interproximal reduction or temporary anchorage devices. Practitioner confidence levels increased after viewing the setups. In cases where the treatment plan changed, the practitioner's confidence level in the plan increased the most, and the final confidence level was uniformly high among all practitioners. Practitioners reported the most helpful features of digital setups were the ability to superimpose the setup with the original model, determine the amount of tooth movement needed, check the final incisal relationship (overjet and overbite), and establish the amount of interproximal reduction required.
CONCLUSIONS: Viewing digital setups resulted in changes to the treatment plans in about 24% of the cases. The use of digital setups was associated with higher levels of confidence in the selected plans.
Copyright © 2019 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32241361      PMCID: PMC7822303          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.09.008

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


  10 in total

1.  Comparative analysis of traditional radiographs and cone-beam computed tomography volumetric images in the diagnosis and treatment planning of maxillary impacted canines.

Authors:  Eric Haney; Stuart A Gansky; Janice S Lee; Earl Johnson; Koutaro Maki; Arthur J Miller; John C Huang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Construction of orthodontic setup models on a computer.

Authors:  Takuya Kihara; Kotaro Tanimoto; Masahiko Michida; Yuki Yoshimi; Toshikazu Nagasaki; Takeshi Murayama; Kazuo Tanne; Hiroki Nikawa
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Three-dimensional digital modeling and setup.

Authors:  Aldo Macchi; Gianpaolo Carrafiello; Vittorio Cacciafesta; Antonio Norcini
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  Consistency of orthodontic treatment decisions relative to diagnostic records.

Authors:  U K Han; K W Vig; J A Weintraub; P S Vig; C J Kowalski
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1991-09       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  The influence of cephalometrics on orthodontic treatment planning.

Authors:  Peter G Nijkamp; Luc L M H Habets; Irene H A Aartman; Andrej Zentner
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2008-11-03       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Reliability of digital orthodontic setups.

Authors:  Monica S Barreto; Jorge Faber; Carlos J Vogel; Telma M Araujo
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  The importance of the diagnostic setup in the orthodontic treatment plan.

Authors:  Claudia Trindade Mattos; Ana Carolina Rodrigues Gomes; Alexandre Antônio Ribeiro; Lincoln Issamu Nojima; Matilde da Cunha Gonçalves Nojima
Journal:  Int J Orthod Milwaukee       Date:  2012

8.  Coordinating the predetermined pattern and tooth positioner with conventional treatment.

Authors:  H D KESLING
Journal:  Am J Orthod Oral Surg       Date:  1946-05

9.  Comparison of virtual and manual tooth setups with digital and plaster models in extraction cases.

Authors:  Joon Im; Jung-Yul Cha; Kee-Joon Lee; Hyung-Seog Yu; Chung-Ju Hwang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 2.650

Review 10.  Records needed for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning: a systematic review.

Authors:  Robine J Rischen; K Hero Breuning; Ewald M Bronkhorst; Anne Marie Kuijpers-Jagtman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Accuracy and efficiency of automatic tooth segmentation in digital dental models using deep learning.

Authors:  Joon Im; Ju-Yeong Kim; Hyung-Seog Yu; Kee-Joon Lee; Sung-Hwan Choi; Ji-Hoi Kim; Hee-Kap Ahn; Jung-Yul Cha
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 4.996

2.  Automatic Classification for Sagittal Craniofacial Patterns Based on Different Convolutional Neural Networks.

Authors:  Haizhen Li; Ying Xu; Yi Lei; Qing Wang; Xuemei Gao
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-31

3.  MHM bracket design on the path of Dr Andrews of true straight wire technique, prototype study design.

Authors:  Mohamed Abdelaal Elkolaly; Hasan S Hasan; Manal Y Foda
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2022-05-04
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.