Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs

Casko, John S.; Vaden, James L.; Kōkich, Vincent G.; Damone, Joseph; James, R.Don; Cangialosi, Thomas J.; Riolo, Michael L.; Owens, Stephen; Bills, Eldon D.

doi:10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70179-9

Cited by 388 publications

(314 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

253

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This characteristic, however, is not part of Andrews' six keys of optimal occlusion 11,12 or one of the criteria used by the Directors of the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) to evaluate postorthodontic occlusions. 13 Perhaps this contradictory observation is because both Andrews and the ABO directors use only static dental casts and radiographs to evaluate occlusions. Dentists, however, may have the patient in their dental chair and actually watch the patient move through mandibular excursions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other occlusal characteristics that general dentists indicated as important when evaluating postorthodontic occlusions that are part of the ABO criteria 13 and part of Andrews' six keys 11,12 are Class I canines and Class I molars. The characteristic of ''even contact of all teeth in centric occlusion'' also was indicated as an important occlusal characteristic by the general dentists, but this appears only in the ABO's list of criteria.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why Do Dentists Refer to Specific Orthodontists?

Hall

Sohn

McNamara

2009

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study tested the hypothesis that the quality of treatment outcomes and overall patient satisfaction are of equal importance in influencing a general dentist to refer a patient to an orthodontist for treatment. The investigation also attempted to determine what specific aspects of an orthodontically treated occlusion comprise an outstanding result in the opinion of the general dentist. Materials and Methods: Self-administered surveys containing 35 questions were distributed to a random sample of 1000 general dentists in the midwestern United States. Results: Three-quarters responded that the quality of previous orthodontic treatment and patient/ parental satisfaction were of equal importance in the orthodontic referral decision. If additional factors were considered, the quality of the treated result as judged by the general dentist was far more important than the location of the orthodontist's office, the reputation of the orthodontist, or the anticipated cost of treatment. With regard to desired postorthodontic occlusal and functional characteristics, the majority of the dentists ranked canine guidance as most important. Other characteristics were Class I molar and canine relationships, even contact of all teeth in centric occlusion, amount of overjet and overbite, absence of spacing, and absence of balancing interferences. Conclusions:The decision of the general dentist to refer a patient to one orthodontist over another is based on a number of interactive factors. It behooves the orthodontic clinician to provide high-quality treatment, to interact well with his or her patients and their families, and to maintain good communications with general practitioners in the community. (Angle Orthod. 2009;79:5-11.)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why Do Dentists Refer to Specific Orthodontists?

Hall

Sohn

McNamara

2009

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The marginal ridges leveling of adjacent teeth constitutes one of the prerequisites of a successful orthodontic treatment as it helps to level the cementoenamel junction of these teeth, performing bone level planning and achieving ideal occlusal contacts with greater ease [1,20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It constitutes one of the major requirements at the end of a successful orthodontic treatment, and these outcomes may be assessed by many evaluation methods [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the posterior bracket placement patterns reliable?

Mattielo¹,

Arruda²,

Xavier³

et al. 2016

Rev. Odonto Ciênc. (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Investigate the marginal ridges leveling accuracy of Alexander and Viazis bracket placement methods. Methods: Eighty pairs of dental casts were selected, with complete permanent dentition, without occlusal wear or restorations. A linking line between mesial and distal ridges of posterior teeth was done to measure the occlusal thirds with digital caliper. The means, obtained from 3 different examiners, were compared with the values of Alexander and Viazis' equations through One-way ANOVA with α=0.05. Results: The second premolar placement value (x) suggested by the authors showed no difference in comparison to the occlusal third size of the sample teeth (p>0.05), however for the first premolars, a significant difference was found (p<0.001). The value adopted for positioning on the first permanent molars (x-0.5mm) is consistent with the size of the occlusal third of these teeth (p=0.0531). A significant difference was also found for the second permanent molars bracket positioning between the predefined value (x-1mm) and the sample (p<0.001). Conclusions: The vertical positioning values proposed by Alexander and Viazis for placement of second premolars and first permanent molars do contribute to the leveling of marginal ridges, which cannot be applied for the values recommended for the first premolars and second permanent molars.Key words: Dental bonding; Orthodontic appliances; Orthodontic brackets Os padrões de posicionamento posterior de bráquetes são confiáveis?ResuMO Objetivo: Verificar a precisão no nivelamento de cristas marginais dos padrões de posicionamento de bráquetes de Alexander e Viazis em dentes posteriores. Métodos: Foram selecionados 80 pares de modelos de gesso com dentição permanente completa e sem desgastes ou restaurações oclusais. Uma linha ligando as cristas marginais mesial e distal dos dentes foi demarcada, visando a medição do terço oclusal com um paquímetro digital milimetrado. As médias obtidas de 3 examinadores foram comparadas com os valores propostos por Alexander e Viazis através do teste de One-Way ANOVA com α=0,05. Resultados: O valor (x) proposto para o posicionamento nos segundos pré-molares não apresentou diferença com a dimensão do terço oclusal da amostra (p>0,05); entretanto para os primeiros pré-molares houve diferença significativa (p<0,001). O valor de posicionamento adotado para os primeiros molares permanentes (x-0,5mm) foi condizente com a dimensão do terço oclusal destes dentes (p=0,0531). Houve diferença significativa entre o valor (x-1mm) predifinido para os segundos molares permanentes e a amostra (p<0,001). Conclusões: Os valores de posicionamento de acessórios propostos por Alexander e Viazis para os segundos pré-molares e para os primeiros molares permanentes promovem o nivelamento das cristas marginais, entretanto o mesmo não ocorre para os primeiros pré-molares e segundos molares permanentes.

show abstract

“…The American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) recommended a more solid way of evaluating treatment outcomes 8 . The ABO-OGS uses a specific instrument in measuring dental casts while final panoramic radiographs are also evaluated by visual inspection (Fig.1).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

University clinic and private practice treatment outcomes in Class I extraction and nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Mislik

Konstantonis

Katsadouris

et al. 2016

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes in university vs private practice settings with Class I patients using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. METHODS A parent sample of 580 Class I patients treated with and without extractions of 4 first premolars was subjected to discriminant analysis to identify a borderline spectrum of 66 patients regarding the extraction modality. Of these patients, 34 were treated in private orthodontic practices, and 32 were treated in a university graduate orthodontic clinic. The treatment outcomes were evaluated using the 8 variables of the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. RESULTS The total scores ranged from 10 to 47 (mean, 25.44; SD, 9.8) for the university group and from 14 to 45 (mean, 25.94; SD, 7.7) for the private practice group. The university group achieved better scores for the variables of buccolingual inclination (mean difference, 2.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.59, 3.98; P = 0.01) and marginal ridges (mean difference, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.28, 2.36; P = 0.01), and the private practice group achieved a better score for the variable of root angulation (mean difference, -0.65; 95% CI, -1.26, -0.03; P = 0.04). However, no statistically intergroup differences were found between the total American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System scores (mean difference, -0.5; 95% CI, -3.82, 4.82; P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Patients can receive similar quality of orthodontic treatment in a private practice and a university clinic. The orthodontists in the private practices were more successful in angulating the roots properly, whereas the orthodontic residents accomplished better torque control of the posterior segments and better marginal ridges. ABSTRACT Aim:The aims of this study were to compare treatment outcomes in university vs private practice, Class I patients, by using the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO-OGS). Materials and Method:A parent sample of 580 Class I patients treated with or without extractions of four first premolars was subjected to discriminant analysis in order to identify a borderline spectrum of 66 patients regarding to the extraction modality. Of these patients, 34were treated in private orthodontic practices and 32 in a university graduate orthodontic clinic. The treatment outcomes were evaluated using the 8 variables of the ABO-OGS. Results:The total score ranged from 10 to 47 (mean, 25.44; SD 9.8) Conclusions:Patients can receive similar quality of orthodontic treatment in a private practice or in a university clinic. Orthodontists in a private practice were more successful in angulating the roots properly whereas orthodontic residents accomplished better torque control of the posterior segments and better marginal ridges.

show abstract

Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs

Cited by 388 publications

References 4 publications

Why Do Dentists Refer to Specific Orthodontists?

Why Do Dentists Refer to Specific Orthodontists?

Are the posterior bracket placement patterns reliable?

University clinic and private practice treatment outcomes in Class I extraction and nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About