Orthodontic treatment results evaluated for individual teeth according to the Objective Grading System

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-10
Author(s):  
Oscar Zapata-Noreña ◽  
Alvaro Carvajal-Flórez ◽  
Diana Barbosa-Liz
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Objective Grading System

scholarly journals Outcome assessment of lingual and labial appliances compared with cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and objective grading system in Angle Class II extraction cases

2014 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 400-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toru Deguchi ◽  
Fumie Terao ◽  
Tomo Aonuma ◽  
Tomoki Kataoka ◽  
Yasuyo Sugawara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcomes ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Cephalometric Analysis ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
Peer Assessment Rating

ABSTRACT Objective:  To validate our hypothesis that there would be significant differences in treatment outcomes, including cephalometric values, degree of root resorption, occlusal indices, and functional aspect, between cases treated with labial and lingual appliances. Materials and Methods:  Twenty-four consecutively treated Class II cases with extractions and lingual appliance were compared with 25 matched cases treated with extraction and labial appliance. Orthodontic treatment outcomes were evaluated by cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and an objective grading system (OGS). Additionally, functional analysis was also performed in both groups after orthodontic treatment. Statistical comparison was performed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test within the groups, and the Mann-Whitney U-test was used to compare between the labial and lingual groups. Results:  The only significant difference between the groups was that the interincisal angle was larger in the lingual group than in the labial group. OGS evaluation showed that control over root angulation was significantly worse in the lingual group than in the labial group. There was no significant difference between groups in the amount of root resorption or in functional evaluation. Conclusions:  Generally, lingual appliances offer comparable treatment results to those obtained with labial appliances. However, care should be taken with lingual appliances because they are more prone to produce uprighted incisors and root angulation.

scholarly journals Invisalign and Traditional Orthodontic Treatment Postretention Outcomes Compared Using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

2007 ◽  
Vol 77 (5) ◽  
pp. 864-869 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Kuncio ◽  
Anthony Maganzini ◽  
Clarence Shelton ◽  
Katherine Freeman
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Grading System ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Signed Rank ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
Signed Rank Test ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
One Year

Abstract Objective: To compare the postretention dental changes between patients treated with Invisalign and those treated with conventional fixed appliances. Materials and Methods: This is a comparative cohort study using patient records of one orthodontist in New York City. Two groups of patients were identified that differed only in the method of treatment (Invisalign and Braces group). Dental casts and panoramic radiographs were collected and analyzed using the objective grading system (OGS) of the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO). The cases were evaluated immediately after appliance removal (T1) and at a postretention time (T2), three years after appliance removal. All patients had completed active orthodontic treatment and had undergone at least one year of retention. A Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to evaluate differences in treatment outcomes between the groups for each of the eight categories in the OGS, including four additional subcategories in the alignment category. A Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to determine the significance of changes within each group from T1 to T2. Results: The change in the total alignment score in the Invisalign group was significantly larger than that for the Braces group. There were significant changes in total alignment and mandibular anterior alignment in both groups. There were significant changes in maxillary anterior alignment in the Invisalign group only. Conclusions: In this sample for this period of observation, patients treated with Invisalign relapsed more than those treated with conventional fixed appliances.

scholarly journals Orthodontic treatment outcomes obtained by application of a finishing protocol

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alvaro Carvajal-Flórez ◽  
Diana María Barbosa-Lis ◽  
Oscar Arturo Zapata-Noreña ◽  
Julissa Andrea Marín-Velásquez ◽  
Sergio Andrés Afanador-Bayona
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Graduate Program ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Panoramic Radiographs ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Objective Grading System

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the results of a finishing protocol implemented in patients treated in the Orthodontics graduate program at Universidad de Antioquia. Evaluation was carried out by means of the criteria set by the Objective Grading System (OGS) of the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO). Methods: Cast models and panoramic radiographs of 34 patients were evaluated. The intervention group (IG) consisted of 17 patients (19.88 ± 4.4 years old) treated under a finishing protocol. This protocol included training in finishing, application of a finishing guide, brackets repositioning and patient's follow-up. Results of the IG were compared to a control group of 17 patients (21.88 ± 7.0 years old) selected by stratified randomization without finishing intervention (CG). Results: The scores for both CG and IG were 38.00 ± 9.0 and 31.41 ± 9.6 (p = 0.048), respectively. The score improved significantly in the IG group, mainly regarding marginal ridges (CG: 5.59 ± 2.2; IG: 3.65 ± 1.8) (p = 0.009) and root angulation (CG: 7.59 ± 2.8; IG: 4.88 ± 2.6) (p = 0.007). Criteria that did not improve, but had the highest scores were: alignment (CG: 6.35 ± 2.7; IG: 6.82 ± 2.8) (p = 0.62) and buccolingual inclination (CG: 3.6 ± 5.88; IG: 5.29 ± 3.9) (p = 0.65). Conclusions: Standardization and implementation of a finishing protocol contributed to improve clinical performance in the Orthodontics graduate program, as expressed by occlusal outcomes. Greater emphasis should be given on the finishing phase to achieve lower scores in the ABO grading system.

scholarly journals The differences in the objective grading system index before and after dentoskeletal class I ortodontic treatment using the standard Edgewise appliances

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Endah Damaryanti ◽  
Bergman Thahar ◽  
Jono Salim ◽  
Endah Mardiati
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class I ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Panoramic Radiographs ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Smile Esthetics ◽  
Dental Casts

Orthodontic treatment has a main purpose to reach balanced functional occlusion and create a harmonic esthetic face. But several studies indicates that orthodontic treatment influence smile esthetics, especially smile arc and buccal corridor. One-third of the treated patients showed a flat smile arc and orthodontic treatment with extraction resulted in excessive buccal corridors. The purpose of this research is to evaluate the difference of the Objective Grading System index, developed by the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) and smile aesthetics in patients with Class I dentoskeletal malocclusion before and after orthodontic treatment. Twenty dental casts, panoramic radiographs and grouped pre and post-treatment. Dental casts and panoramic radiographs are scored according to the guidelines of the Objective Grading System. Extra-oral photographs were assessed by researcher using modified Goldstein dentofacial analysis. Result of measurements were evaluated with statistical t-test. Results of the research indicates Objective Grading System index and also score of smile esthetics before and after orthodontic treatment shows difference statistically (for Objective Grading System index P = -1121 > 2.09 and for smile esthetics P = 5.15 > 2.09). But extremely weak relationship was found between Objective Grading System index and Aesthetics smiles (231).

scholarly journals Post orthodontic treatment stability measurement in dentoskeletal class I malocclusion based on the objective grading system index

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Anthony Pasaribu ◽  
Bergman Thahar ◽  
Jono Salim ◽  
Endah Mardiati
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class I ◽  
Treatment Result ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
Stability Measurement ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Stability

The purpose of this study was to examine the stability of orthodontic treatment results in dentoskeletal class I malocclusion treated with and without extraction of four premolars and to compare the stability of treatment result between those groups. Occlusal relationship after treatment and six-month post retention were measured on dental cast using The Objective Grading System Index at Orthodontic Specialist Clinic, Faculty of Dentistry Universitas Padjadjaran. The analytic descriptive study was carried out on 30 samples that comprised 14 samples were treated without extraction of four premolars and 16 samples were treated with extraction of four premolars. ABO Measuring Gauge was used to measure seven variables: tooth alignment, the height of the marginal ridges, buccolingual inclination, occlusal relationships, occlusal contacts, overjet, and interproximal tooth contacts. The results were statistically analyzed with the Wilcoxon rank test to test the difference of The Objective Grading System Index between posttreatment and postretension. Mann-Whitney U test was applied to determine the difference between the group with the extraction of four premolars and the group without extraction of four premolars. The level of significance was set at 0.05. The results of this study showed these following variables: tooth alignment, occlusal contacts, and overjet were unstable at the group with the extraction of four premolars, while only tooth alignment was found to be unstable in the group without extraction of the four premolars. Mann-Whitney U test did not show statistically significant difference in stability comparison test between the groups.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document