Development of the Orthodontic Treatment Impact Questionnaire: Cross-sectional validation

Benson, Philip; Alshawy, Ebrahim; Kettle, Jennifer; Gilchrist, Fiona

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.06.018

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Tooth extraction for orthodontic treatment has been used since the beginning of the 20th century 29 . The most common teeth extracted are first premolars and treatment effects are frequently evaluated according to their occlusal, stability and facial aesthetic outcomes 30 . In this context we present this case‐series study about the behaviour of NLA after incisors retraction following premolars extraction in patients with Class I dentoalveolar biprotrusion with higher and smaller pretreatment NLA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering the role of nasolabial angle in premolar extraction decision‐making: A case‐series study

Mattos,

de Almeida,

Silveira

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact of changes in upper incisor inclination and position on the alteration of the nasolabial angle (NLA) in a series of cases involving the extraction of four first premolars.Materials and MethodsThe study included 41 patients who underwent orthodontic treatment with premolar extractions. The patients were divided into two groups based on their pretreatment NLA values: Group 1 (NLA ≤ 100°) and Group 2 (NLA > 100°). Measurements of NLA, U1.NA and U1‐NA were obtained before and after treatment and U1‐Ls pretreatment measure was registered. Statistical analyses were performed to compare the differences in NLA, U1.NA and U1‐NA between the two groups and to evaluate the influence of these variables added to U1‐Ls (T1) on NLA changes.ResultsThe results showed that Group 1 exhibited significant changes in NLA, while Group 2 did not. However, both groups showed significant changes in U1.NA and U1‐NA. In Group 1, 80% of the individuals presented an increase in NLA and 20% no changes. In Group 2, 10% presented a decrease, 57% no changes and 33% an increase in NLA values. Multiple linear regression analysis indicated that the group factor had a statistically significant influence on NLA variation. Additionally, in Group 2, a negative correlation was observed between changes in U1.NA and NLA.ConclusionsThe findings suggest that individuals with higher pretreatment NLA values tend to maintain their NLA values even after the correction of upper incisor inclination.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering the role of nasolabial angle in premolar extraction decision‐making: A case‐series study

Mattos,

de Almeida,

Silveira

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I am a member of a research group that has wrestled for years with the ethics and practicalities of designing and undertaking an RCT to investigate differences in outcomes between orthodontic patients treated with the removal of premolars. We have recently come to the conclusion that a prospective cohort study is more likely to yield more useful data (Benson et al., 2023). Other advantages of non-experimental studies are that large sample sizes can be achieved, and it could be argued that participants in a large prospectively recruited sample are more representative of an unselected population than those in a highly selective RCT sample, making the results more generalisable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fifty years of the British / Journal of Orthodontics

Benson

2023

J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is 50 years since publication of the first volume of the British Journal of Orthodontics ( BJO). Now known as the Journal of Orthodontics ( JO), the official journal of the British Orthodontic Society strives to published high quality, evidence-based research. Aim: To compare the content of articles published by the BJO in 1973–1974 with those in the JO in 2022–2023 to identify any changes over 50 years. Methods: BJO volume 1 issues 1–5 and JO volume 49 issues 2–4 and volume 50 issues 1–2 were hand-searched and full articles obtained. Some articles were excluded. The included reports were assessed using objective criteria (see Supplemental materials ). Results: Similar proportions of articles reporting the results of studies collecting data directly from participants of orthodontic interest were published ( BJO: n = 12, 26%; JO: n = 15, 23%); however, there was an increase in the proportion of articles reporting studies that collected data from a non-orthodontic patient sample ( BJO: n = 5, 11%; JO: n = 15, 23%). There was also an increase in the reporting of prospective data collection ( BJO: n = 1; 6%; JO: n = 23, 79%), but much of this research was cross-sectional ( BJO: n = 8, 50%; JO: n = 20, 69%), using convenience sampling ( BJO: n = 13, 81%; JO: n = 23, 79% of articles reporting the results of data collected from human participants). Most research was non-experimental ( BJO: n = 16, 100%; JO: n = 26, 90%). Conclusions: Some similarities in the types of reports published were found, as well as some encouraging differences. Decreasing retrospective data reports and increasing prospective data reports is welcome, but many are still non-experimental and cross-sectional. There is a need to publish more longitudinal, experimental clinical data to enhance knowledge and understanding of the effects of orthodontic treatment.

show abstract

“…It was instituted that the target group of a questionnaire is an important part during designing the questionnaire [18]. The sample that filled the questionnaire in this study were preadolescents having the same skeletal malocclusion (skeletal class II), Since this age group is usually undergo emotional changes, moreover their social relations during activities are important, therefore, the initial draft of study questionnaire was designed to accommodate these experiences after 4-6 months from using removable functional treatment.…”

Section: Design the Questionnairementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In orthodontic field and for effective orthodontic appliance; technically the appliance must be functional and effective; practically it must be easily used, and comfortable for their users to enhance its success. So that including patients' perceptions for new orthodontic treatment and appliance will provide researchers a view about the pros and cons of the treatment through assessing different aspects of OHRQoL [16][17][18]. Currently, new designs of orthodontic functional appliance have been developed using different materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a questionnaire for patient perception to functional appliances

Haik,

Yassir

2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To developed and evaluate the validity, reliability, and Arabic translation of a questionnaire for preadolescent perception to removable functional appliances. Subjects and methods A new questionnaire was drafted based on previously used questionnaires. Twelve orthodontic experts were selected within content and face validity panel and twenty preadolescents wearing functional appliances were participated in the face validation of the questionnaire. Two rounds of content validity were performed with the same experts. The final form of the validated questionnaire was translated from English to Arabic language. The content validity index (CVI) was used for content validity and the Cronbach’s alpha test was used to assess the internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire. Results During the first round of content validity, 50 items were relevant to the underlying construct (Item-CVI ≥ 0.78), while four items were considered not valid (Item-CVI < 0.78) and the average scale-CVI was 0.93. In terms of face validation by experts, the percentage of agreement was adequate (96.4%). The questionnaire was modified by removing the non-valid items, adding/modifying items, and merging some categories. For second round of content validity, all items were found to be valid (I-CVI ≥ 0.78) and the overall questionnaire had adequate content validity (Scale-CVI/Ave = 0.94). The translated valid questionnaire also achieved a perfect agreement (100%) for face validity by patients. The internal consistency was appropriate (≥ 0.7). Conclusions A new valid, reliable, and translated questionnaire (English and Arabic versions) that cover the majority of aspects of patients’ perception during treatment with removable functional appliances has been developed.

show abstract

Development of the Orthodontic Treatment Impact Questionnaire: Cross-sectional validation

Cited by 5 publications

References 30 publications

Reconsidering the role of nasolabial angle in premolar extraction decision‐making: A case‐series study

Reconsidering the role of nasolabial angle in premolar extraction decision‐making: A case‐series study

Fifty years of the British / Journal of Orthodontics

Development of a questionnaire for patient perception to functional appliances

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About