Application of Pont's Index to Lithuanian Individuals: a Pilot Study

Abstract

ObjectivesA variety of diagnostic indices in orthodontics have been proposed to help in diagnosis and treatment planning. Pont’s Index was established to predict ideal maxillary dental arch width from the sum of mesiodistal widths of four upper incisors. The aim of this study was to assess the applicability of Pont’s Index to Lithuanian individuals.Material and MethodsThe sample comprised 52 subjects (age range from 18 to 35 years) with normal occlusion. Measurements were obtained directly from plaster casts using a digital calliper. Ideal arch widths were calculated for each subject according to Pont’s formulae, and the correlation coefficients were calculated between the measured and the calculated arch width values.ResultsCorrelation between the measured width values and the corresponding values calculated according to Pont’s Index was moderate in all cases, with correlation coefficients values ranging from 0.59 (mandible) to 0.64 (maxilla) in first premolar’s area and 0.49 in both maxilla and mandible in first molar’s area (P < 0.05). Appropriate index values for Lithuanian individuals were assessed to be 85.57 in premolars and 66.24 in molars area.ConclusionsAccording to the results of this study, there was no strong evidence to suggest that Pont’s Index could be reliably used to predict ideal arch width values in Lithuanian individuals.

Pont’s index - analysis of children from the Polish population aged 11-13.5 years

“…The actual measurements of the width of the anterior and posterior maxilla and mandible were found to be lower in most patients in comparison to the predictions based on Pont's index. Rykman and Smailiene obtained similar results when examining the Lithuanian population (7). According to their observations, 78.8-90% of the measurements of the maxilla were below Pont's value.…”

“…Celebi et al who studied the Turkish population found it to be 0.02-0.36 (8). Al-Omari et al calculated the correlation coefficient for the Jordanian population in the range 0.25-0.39 (9) Badania kliniczne / Clinical research arches in the available literature was noted in the Lithuanian population, where Rykman et al report a correlation coefficient of 0.49-0.64 (7). A slightly smaller correlation, although also supporting the purposefulness of Pont's index, can be found in the studies performed by Gupta et al on the Indian population, where the correlation coefficient for the width of the anterior and posterior mandible is 0.462 and 0.486, respectively (11).…”

“…W dostępnej literaturze największą zależność między wartościami rzeczywistymi szerokości przedniej i tylnej łuków zębowych odnotowano w populacji litewskiej, gdzie Rykman i wsp. donoszą o współczynniku korelacji równym 0,49-0,64 (7). Nieznacznie mniejsza zależność, choć również przemawiająca za celowością stosowania wskaźnika Ponta, występuje w badaniach Gupta i wsp.…”

“…There is a similar relationship for the mandible -both coefficients for the anterior width are more than two times Rzeczywiste pomiary szerokości przedniej i tylnej szczęki oraz żuchwy okazały się u większości pacjentów mniejsze niż predykcje na podstawie wskaźnika Ponta. Podobne wyniki otrzymały Rykman i Smailiene, badając populację litewską (7). Według ich obserwacji w przypadku szczęki 78,8-90% pomiarów znalazło się poniżej wartości Ponta.…”

Scan Aided Dental Arch Width Prediction via Internationally Recognized Formulas and Indices in a Sample of Kurdish Population/Iraq

“…Its accuracy in estimating dental arch widths has been supported by some studies [7,8]. In spite of the fact that some researchers, like Lohakare, have concluded that Pont's index should be used to predetermine ideal arch width values and applied clinically for patients undergoing orthodontic and other dental treatment [8], others have concluded that the index is not reliable enough to be used for clinical purposes [9][10][11][12] due to the fact that its dimension is affected by ethnicity [13], nutrition [14], systemic diseases [15], hormonal factors [16], and gender [17].…”