Factors affecting the duration of orthodontic treatment: a systematic review

Abstract

The aim of this study was to systematically investigate the literature for articles referring exclusively to the duration of orthodontic therapy and to explore the various factors that could affect this. A Medline search from 1990 to the first week of March 2005 was conducted, the Cochrane Database for Systematic Reviews was utilized, five orthodontic journals were hand searched, the abstracts of related articles were reviewed to search for any relevant studies that might have been missed, and the reference lists of the retrieved articles were hand assessed. Eligibility was determined by reading the reports identified by the search. The end result of this search provided 41 articles. Although there is a need for more conclusive research, the present review revealed several conclusions concerning the duration of orthodontic treatment: (1) there are indications that extraction treatment lasts longer than the non-extraction therapy; (2) age does not seem to play a role provided the patients are in the permanent dentition; (3) when Class II division 1 malocclusions are considered, there is evidence that the earlier the orthodontic treatment begins the longer its duration; (4) there is conflicting information regarding treatment duration within public health systems; (5) combined orthodontic-surgical treatment duration is variable and appears to be operator sensitive; (6) various factors, such as the technique employed, the skill and number of operators involved, the compliance of the patients, and the severity of the initial malocclusion, all seem to play a role; and (7) impacted maxillary canines appear to prolong treatment.

White-spot lesions during multibracket appliance treatment: A challenge for clinical excellence

“…Furthermore, the MB-treatment should have lasted for at least one year as this represents a normal average duration for a MB-treatment according to literature (Richmond et al, 1993;Teh et al, 2000;Mavreas et al, 2008). It was also considered, that the retention period should have lasted for at least one year, because it has been shown that most remineralization procedures take place during the first six months after treatment and beyond one year no major changes are seen (Fehr et al, 1970;Artun and Thylsturp, 1989).…”

Evaluation of Effects of Orthodontic Malocclusions on Duration of Treatment with Regard to the Labor/Cost Concept

“…7,13 Many studies have been conducted on malocclusion classification and have reported that the duration of treatment generally differed depending on the treatment approach. [13][14][15][16] However, studies that compared the duration of treatment on the basis of Angle classifications were usually poster abstracts presented at conferences and there were no detailed studies available. In this study, the average treatment period for 387 patients was found as 27.8 months.…”

“…Studies have conferred that treatments with extraction lasted longer than those without extraction, and single-phase treatments shorten the duration of treatment. 13,16 Furthermore, independent of the malocclusion, the existence of a unilaterally or bilaterally impacted canine could lengthen the duration of the treatment. 20,21 As per such examples and the findings of this study, it could be determined that a pricing solely based on classification is not sufficient, or fair, with respect to the labor/cost balance.…”

“…However, the duration of treatment and the effort spent can differ depend on the severity of the malocclusion, not on the type of the malocclusion. 13,14,16 As the difficulty and severity increases, the duration of treatment extends and the labor spent multiplies.…”

Perception and Practice of Nepalese Adult and Adolescent Patients towards Orthodontic Treatment

“…18,19 The reasons cited to be because of decreased vascularity and low cellular response for OTM. 20 …”