Factors affecting treatment decisions for Class I malocclusions

Ali, Batool; Shaikh, Attiya; Fida, Mubassar

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.11.035

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Likewise, according to Shearn and Woods 19 , incisor overjet is one of the major factor influencing the extraction decision. Analogous to the results of our study, Ali et al 20 , and Konstantonis and co-workers 21 reported that incisor proclination, lip prominence and crowded arches are also one of the deciding factors in treatment of a Class I malocclusion.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The results of the current study based on end-on Class II molar relationship is dissimilar to the results of previous studies in a few aspects. [17][18][19][20] Firstly, the overjet was not found to play a significant role in the extraction decision of end-on Class II molar relationship patients. Secondly, crowding which has been shown to play a key role in Class I and full unit Class II malocclusion cases, was found to play no significant role in extraction decision in cases with end-on Class II molar relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identification of Orthodontic Extraction Predictors in End-On Class II Malocclusion

Ali¹,

Jeelani²,

Shaikh³

et al. 2021

J Pak Dent Assoc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BJECTIVE: This study was designed to determine the different treatment predictors which help in the extraction and non-extraction decision of an end-on Class II malocclusion case. METHODOLOGY: The pretreatment records of 240 adult subjects aged 15-40 years with bilateral end-on Class II molar relationship were retrospectively selected and categorized under extraction (120) and non-extraction (120) treatment categories. The extraction cases were planned for different combinations of premolar extractions. The independent variables i.e., the cephalometric and orthodontic cast measurements were obtained from the recruited sample. Binary logistic regression analysis was applied using SPSS software. RESULTS: Increased upper and lower incisor inclinations (p < 0.001) and procumbent upper lip (p = 0.004) was statistically significant in the extraction group. According to the regression model, the odds of extraction treatment were 1.12 times greater than non-extraction treatment for every one degree increase in upper and lower incisor inclinations, respectively. The chances of extraction treatment were 1.6 times higher than non-extraction treatment for every 1 mm increase in the distance of upper lip to S-plane. CONCLUSIONS: The upper and lower incisors inclinations and upper lip position are the critical factors affecting the extraction decision in adult patients with end-on Class II molar relationships. Overjet, dental crowding and the vertical growth pattern were found to be clinically insignificant in opting for an extraction treatment plan for such cases. KEYWORDS: Treatment, Angle Class II, tooth extraction, non-extraction

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Identification of Orthodontic Extraction Predictors in End-On Class II Malocclusion

Ali¹,

Jeelani²,

Shaikh³

et al. 2021

J Pak Dent Assoc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The major factor dictating extractions was the soft tissue profile (Fig. 1), thus highlighting orthodontists’ concern about facial and smile esthetic appearance (22). Surprisingly, the prevalence of extractions of first and second upper premolars was very similar (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The third most reported reason for extractions was the inclination of the incisors’ axes. Although the literature is lacking sound evidence that proclined teeth have an increased risk of gingival recession (28), this is still considered an issue in some cases for the soft tissue profile and facial aesthetics (22).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which factors influence orthodontists in their decision to extract? A questionnaire survey

Evrard¹,

Tepedino²,

Cattaneo³

et al. 2019

J Clin Exp Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background To evaluate the relative influence of different criteria in the choice between extraction and nonextraction treatment in current orthodontics, and to assess how the percentage of extractions has evolved over time. Material and Methods Pre-treatment records (panoramic radiograph, lateral cephalogram, study casts and photographs) of fourteen cases in permanent dentition (adult or adolescent) with class I molar relationship and moderate anterior crowding were evaluated by 28 orthodontists. For each case, each orthodontist filled out a questionnaire reporting his treatment plan proposal (extraction or nonextraction) and the importance of specific parameters in his decision-making process, using categorical scales. Orthodontists practicing for more than 15 years were also asked to compare this decision with the one they would have taken at the beginning of their professional career. Results The two most important factors in the decision-making were the soft tissue profile and the amount of crowding. The least important factor was the presence of third molars. In cases of nonextraction treatment, the lack of space was managed mostly by dental expansion and stripping. Twenty percent of the case evaluations revealed extraction(s) decisions. Among the orthodontists practicing for more than 15 years, the current extraction rate reached 24%, whereas the same orthodontists reported they would have extracted in 39% of the cases in the past. Conclusions The present study suggests that soft tissue profile has a higher impact than traditional criteria such as cephalometric measurements in the extraction decision. This is associated with a decreased extractions rate compared to the past. Key words: Orthodontics, extractions, survey, treatment planning.

show abstract

“…No statistically significant difference was found in arch widths (interincisal and inter-canine widths) in previous literature reviews, while significant differences were observed in inter-molar widths in both extraction and non-extraction groups. 22,23 The pretreatment records of 202 patients were selected at random. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and the surviving records were divided into extraction (n =92) and non-extraction (n=110) groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Tooth Widths, Arch Widths and Arch Lengths in Class-I Normal Dentition to Class-I and II Crowded Dentitions

Shafique¹,

Zaheer²,

Jan³

et al. 2021

Pak J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective: Dental study casts play a vital role in the diagnosis and treatment planning of various orthodontic cases. This study was carried out to compare the tooth widths, arch widths, and arch lengths in Class-I normal dentition to those in Class-I and Class-II crowded dentition in an effort to improve treatment planning and to eventually reduce treatment duration. Methods: Total 170 patients, 12 to 40 years of age with a complete set of permanent teeth till 1st molars; who presented to the Orthodontics Department at Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (A.F.I.D), Rawalpindi from Sep 2019 to Feb 2020, were included in the study. Non-probability purposive method of sampling was used. The dental casts obtained were used to measure tooth widths, arch widths, and arch lengths. Subjects were classified into Class-I normal and Class-I and Class-II crowded occlusion and comparison of the sum of tooth widths, arch widths, and arch length discrepancies were determined among the three occlusion groups. Data was analyzed in SPSS version 21 and independent samples t-test was used to differentiate the variables of interest. Results: Out of 170 subjects, 73 (42.9%) subjects had Class-I normal occlusion while 97 (57%) had Class-I and Class-II crowded occlusions. No statistical difference was found between the occlusal groups with regard to the sum of tooth widths, inter-canine widths, inter-first premolar widths, inter-second premolar widths and inter-molar widths. However, a remarkable difference was observed between the occlusal groups with respect to arch perimeters and arch length discrepancies (p = 0.000 and 0.000 respectively). Conclusions: Results of the current study indicate that crowding of teeth occurs as a consequence of decreased arch perimeters which may lead to increased arch length discrepancies. However, no prominent difference was noticed in the sum of tooth widths and arch widths among different occlusal groups. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.2.3240 How to cite this:Shafique HZ, Zaheer R, Jan A, Fazal A. Comparison of Tooth Widths, Arch Widths and Arch Lengths in Class-I Normal Dentition to Class-I and II Crowded Dentitions. Pak J Med Sci. 2021;37(2):---------. doi: https://doi.org/10.12669/pjms.37.2.3240 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Factors affecting treatment decisions for Class I malocclusions

Cited by 7 publications

References 17 publications

Identification of Orthodontic Extraction Predictors in End-On Class II Malocclusion

Identification of Orthodontic Extraction Predictors in End-On Class II Malocclusion

Which factors influence orthodontists in their decision to extract? A questionnaire survey

Comparison of Tooth Widths, Arch Widths and Arch Lengths in Class-I Normal Dentition to Class-I and II Crowded Dentitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About