Orthodontic treatment outcome using the ABO grading system for dental casts

2002 ◽  
Vol 121 (3) ◽  
pp. 329
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Dental Casts

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).

Orthodontic treatment of a patient with unilateral orofacial muscle dysfunction: The efficacy of myofunctional therapy on the treatment outcome

2016 ◽  
Vol 150 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasuyo Sugawara ◽  
Yoshihito Ishihara ◽  
Teruko Takano-Yamamoto ◽  
Takashi Yamashiro ◽  
Hiroshi Kamioka
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Muscle Dysfunction ◽  
Myofunctional Therapy

A Six-Center International Study of Treatment Outcome in Patients with Clefts of the Lip and Palate: Part 3. Dental Arch Relationships

1992 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 405-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Mars ◽  
Catherine Asher-Mcdade ◽  
Viveca Brattström ◽  
Erik Dahl ◽  
John Mcwilliam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Cleft Palate ◽  
Treatment Program ◽  
Surgical Techniques ◽  
International Study ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dental Arch ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Dental Casts

One hundred and forty-nine dental casts of subjects with complete unilateral clefts of the lip and palate from six European cleft palate centers were assessed by means of the Goslon Yardstick. The Yardstick proved capable of discriminating between the quality of the dental arch relationships between the six centers. Two centers showed especially poor results. Three centers obtained satisfactory results although differing surgical techniques were used in these centers. One of the centers showing satisfactory dental arch relationships employed a more complex and expensive treatment program than the other two centers, which both used simpler centralized treatment regimens.

scholarly journals The Relationship between Palatal Displacement of Upper Canines and Incisors Widths in a Syrian Sample of Patients with Uncrowded Arches

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 873-875 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luai Mahaini
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Matched Control ◽  
Control Sample ◽  
Tooth Size ◽  
Orthodontic Patients ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Mandibular Incisors ◽  
Dental Casts

ABSTRACT The aim of this study investigates mesiodistal crown size of the maxillary and mandibular incisors of patients with palatally impacted canines (PDC). Pretreatment dental casts of orthodontic patients with PDC of one or both maxillary canines (N: 33) were collected. This PDC sample was matched according to age and sex with pretreatment dental casts from unaffected orthodontic patients. For the PDC and matched control samples, maximum mesiodistal crown diameters were recorded for the four incisors on the right side only. The results showed that, on average, the mesiodistal crown diameters for the maxillary and mandibular incisors measured smaller in the PDC sample than in the control sample. These findings of statistically significant tooth-size reductions associated with PDC occurrence indicate a generalized pattern of reduced tooth size as a characteristic associated with the PDC anomaly. Further, the presence of generalized tooth-size reduction in cases with palatally displaced canines help explain why most orthodontic treatment plans for PDC patients are of the nonextraction type. How to cite this article Mahaini L. The Relationship between Palatal Displacement of Upper Canines and Incisors Widths in a Syrian Sample of Patients with Uncrowded Arches. J Contemp Dent Pract 2015;16(11):873-875

Assessing the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system: Digital vs plaster dental casts

2007 ◽  
Vol 131 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troy R. Okunami ◽  
Budi Kusnoto ◽  
Ellen BeGole ◽  
Carla A. Evans ◽  
Cyril Sadowsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Grading System ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
Dental Casts

The impact of obesity on orthodontic treatment outcome in adolescents: a prospective clinical cohort study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hayder F Saloom ◽  
Roshanak Boustan ◽  
Jadbinder Seehra ◽  
Spyridon N Papageorgiou ◽  
Guy H Carpenter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Normal Weight ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Weight Group ◽  
Normal Weight Group ◽  
Clinical Cohort ◽  
Pre Treatment

Summary Introduction This prospective clinical cohort study investigated the potential influence of obesity on orthodontic treatment outcome. Methods A prospective cohort of adolescent patients undergoing routine fixed appliance treatment were recruited into normal-weight or obese groups based upon body mass index (BMI) centile and followed up until the completion of treatment. Primary outcome was treatment duration, and secondary outcomes included treatment outcome (occlusal change measured using peer assessment rating [PAR]), appointment characteristics, and compliance measures. Results A total of 45 patients mean age 14.8 (1.6) years were included in the final analysis. The normal-weight group included 23 patients with mean BMI 19.4 (2.4) kg/m2 and the obese group 22 patients with mean BMI 30.5 (3.8) kg/m2. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics between groups, except for BMI and pre-treatment PAR. The normal-weight group had a mean pre-treatment PAR of 25.6 (8.3) and the obese 33.3 (11.8) giving the obese group a more severe pre-treatment malocclusion (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in treatment duration between groups (P = 0.36), but obese patients needed less time per each additional baseline PAR point compared to normal weight (P = 0.02). Obese patients also needed less appointments compared to normal-weight patients (P = 0.02). There were no significant differences between groups for appointment characteristics or compliance. Finally, obese patients were more likely to experience a great PAR reduction than normal-weight patients (relative risk = 2.6; 95% confidence interval = 1.2–4.2; P = 0.02). Conclusions There were no significant differences in treatment duration between obese and normal-weight patients. Obesity does not appear to be a risk factor for negative orthodontic treatment outcome with fixed appliances.

scholarly journals Anterior tooth alignment: A comparison of orthodontic retention regimens 5 years posttreatment

2014 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 353-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ragnar Bjering ◽  
Kari Birkeland ◽  
Vaska Vandevska-Radunovic
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Outcome ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Anterior Tooth ◽  
Significant Deterioration ◽  
Par Index ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Posttreatment Period ◽  
Component Scores ◽  
Time Point

ABSTRACT Objective:  To assess orthodontic treatment outcome at debonding and at 3 and 5 years after orthodontic treatment and to investigate the influence of different retention protocols on anterior tooth alignment. Materials and Methods:  Using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index, 169 patients (74 boys, 95 girls) were analyzed at four stages: pretreatment (T0), posttreatment (T1), 3 years posttreatment (T3), and 5 years posttreatment (T5). The PAR anterior component scores (ACSs) were compared between groups with different retention protocols. In the maxilla, protocols were removable retainer until T3 (MAX1), removable and fixed retainer until T3 (MAX2), and removable retainer until T3 and fixed retainer until T5 (MAX3). In the mandible, protocols were no retainer (MAND1), fixed 3-3 retainer until T3 (MAND2), and fixed 3-3 retainer until T5 (MAND3). Results:  Mean weighted improvement in PAR score was 88.3% at T1, 86.4% at T3, and 82.1% at T5. The ACS for the maxilla showed no significant differences between the retention protocols at any time point. In the mandible, the group without retention showed a gradual but not significant deterioration in ACS throughout the posttreatment period. At T5 there was a significant difference in ACS between the group that had the retainer removed at T3 and the group that kept the retainer. Conclusion:  The 5-year treatment outcome, as measured by the PAR Index, was good. Stability of the maxillary anterior alignment 5 years posttreatment did not appear to be influenced by choice of retention protocol. Mandibular anterior alignment was significantly better for the group using a fixed retainer compared with the group where the retainer was removed 3 years posttreatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document