scholarly journals A comparison of traditional and computer-aided bracket placement methods

2011 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 828-835 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Israel ◽  
Budi Kusnoto ◽  
Carla A. Evans ◽  
Ellen BeGole
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Sample Group ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Indirect Bonding ◽  
Objective Grading System ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Artificial Teeth

Abstract Objective: To test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the accuracy of bracket placement produced by OrthoCAD iQ indirect bonding (IDB) and that of an in-house fabricated IDB system by measuring the quality of intra-arch dental alignment at the end of simulated orthodontic treatment. Materials and Methods: Twenty-eight artificial teeth were arranged to resemble a typical preorthodontic malocclusion. Forty-six sets of models were duplicated from the original malocclusion and randomly divided into two sample groups. Half of the models had their bracket positions selected by OrthoCAD, while the others were completed by a combination of faculty and residents in a university orthodontic department. Indirect bonding trays were fabricated for each sample and the brackets were transferred back to the original malocclusion following typical bonding protocol. The individual teeth were ligated on a .021 × .025-inch stainless steel archwire to simulate their posttreatment positions. The two sample groups were compared using the objective grading system (OGS) originally designed by the American Board of Orthodontics. Results: The mean total OGS score for the OrthoCAD sample group was 39.25 points, while the traditional IDB technique scored 41.00 points. No statistical difference was found between total scores or any of the four components evaluated. Similar ranges of scores were observed, with the OrthoCAD group scoring from 30 to 52 points and the traditional IDB group scoring from 33 to 53 points. Conclusions: The hypothesis is not accepted. OrthoCAD iQ does not currently offer a system that can position orthodontic brackets better or more reliably than traditional indirect bonding techniques.

Quality of Life for Children with Persistent Sinonasal Symptoms

2003 ◽  
Vol 128 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Kay ◽  
Richard M. Rosenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Longitudinal Change ◽  
Good Test ◽  
Routine Clinical Care ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Sinonasal Symptoms

OBJECTIVE: The goal was to validate the SN-5 survey as a measure of longitudinal change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) for children with persistent sinonasal symptoms. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted a before and after study of 85 children aged 2 to 12 years in a metropolitan pediatric otolaryngology practice. Caregivers completed the SN-5 survey at entry and at least 4 weeks later. The survey included 5 symptom-cluster items covering the domains of sinus infection, nasal obstruction, allergy symptoms, emotional distress, and activity limitations. RESULTS: Good test-retest reliability ( R = 0.70) was obtained for the overall SN-5 score and the individual survey items ( R ≥ 0.58). The mean baseline SN-5 score was 3.8 (SD, 1.0) of a maximum of 7.0, with higher scores indicating poorer HRQoL. All SN-5 items had adequate correlation ( R ≥ 0.36) with external constructs. The mean change in SN-5 score after routine clinical care was 0.88 (SD, 1.19) with an effect size of 0.74 indicating good responsiveness to longitudinal change. The change scores correlated appropriately with changes in related external constructs ( R ≥ 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: The SN-5 is a valid, reliable, and responsive measure of HRQoL for children with persistent sinonasal symptoms, suitable for use in outcomes studies and routine clinical care.

scholarly journals Orthodontic Treatment Characteristics and Outcomes in an Educational Setting

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
T. Al-Jewair ◽  
V. Ryan ◽  
S. Warunek
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Educational Setting ◽  
Dental Esthetics ◽  
Treatment Characteristics ◽  
The Mean

Background. To assess and correlate orthodontic treatment characteristics and outcomes in an educational setting. Methods. A total of 287 patients were included. Independent chart reviews were conducted to gather demographic and pretreatment diagnostic information. Posttreatment digital records were graded with the ABO C-R Eval and the CCA methods. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine associations between variables. Results. Of the 287 patients, 122 (42.5%) were male and 165 (57.5%) were female. The total average treatment time was 33.87 ± 10.28 months, with a range from 11 to 75 months. The mean ABO C-R Eval score was 29.10 ± 8.59 points. The parameters with the highest scores were buccolingual inclination and occlusal contacts. The mean CCA score was 3.36 ± 2.05 points. The highest scores were recorded for dental esthetics and management of the periodontium. Higher ABO DI scores were weakly correlated with longer treatment times (r = 0.258; p<0.001). ABO C-R Eval scores showed a weakly significant association with treatment duration (r = 0.162; p=0.006), while CCA scores were moderately associated with treatment duration (r = 0.451; p<0.001). Conclusions. As treatment duration increased, the total ABO C-R Eval and CCA scores tended to increase; thus, quality of treatment outcomes decreased. A significant positive correlation was also found with the ABO DI score and treatment duration.

An interlaboratory study of the determination of digoxin by immunoassay.

1980 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 480-486
Author(s):  
D M Fast ◽  
W H Hannon ◽  
C A Burtis ◽  
D D Bayse
Keyword(s):  
Frequency Distribution ◽  
Statistical Difference ◽  
Analytical Data ◽  
Statistical Information ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Clinical Laboratories ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Computational Procedures

Abstract We conducted a voluntary survey of laboratories and manufacturers to assess the current quality of analytical assays for serum digoxin. More than 300 clinical laboratories and 18 manufacturers responded, giving data on methods, instruments, computational procedures, and results for five survey samples. We sorted the analytical data to provide statistical information on the grand mean values separately for manufacturers and clinical laboratories, the frequency distribution of all reported values, and the mean values by method of interpolation and algorithms used for linear transformation. There was no statistical difference (alpha = 0.05) between the means for each specimen as determined by the kit manufacturers as a group and the clinical laboratories as a group.

scholarly journals Quality of orthodontic treatment performed by orthodontists and general dentists

2011 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leandro Silva Marques ◽  
Nacler de Freitas Junior ◽  
Luciano José Pereira ◽  
Maria Letícia Ramos-Jorge
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Statistical Tests ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Quality Outcomes ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Initial Severity ◽  
Level Of Significance ◽  
General Dentists

AbstractObjective:To perform a blind comparative evaluation of the quality of orthodontic treatment provided by orthodontists and general dentists.Materials and Methods:Sixty cases of orthodontic treatment were evaluated—30 treated by specialists in orthodontics and 30 treated by general dentists with no specialization course. Orthodontists were selected randomly by lots, in a population of 1596 professionals, and recordings were performed based on the guideline established by the Objective Grading System proposed by the American Board of Orthodontics. Each participant was asked to present a case considered representative of the best outcome among the cases treated, regardless of the type or initial severity of the malocclusion. Statistical analysis involved the chi-square, Wilcoxon, and Mann-Whitney tests. The level of significance was set at P  =  .05 for the statistical tests.Results:The results showed that 29 orthodontists (96.7%) presented cases considered satisfactory and would be approved on the qualification exam, whereas only 15 dentists (50%) had cases considered satisfactory. Moreover, treatment time was significantly shorter among the orthodontists (P  =  .022), and the posttreatment comparison revealed that orthodontists achieved better outcomes considering all the variables studied.Conclusions:Orthodontists spend less time on treatment and achieve better quality outcomes than cases treated by general dentists who have not undergone a specialization course in orthodontics.

scholarly journals PAR Index in the Evaluation of the Stability of the Orthodontic Treatment Results. A Review

2006 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 203-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chaitra Ramanathan
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Quality Of Work ◽  
Par Index ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Individual Scores ◽  
The Impact

The evaluation of the treatment results is normally done to estimate the nature and quality of work, so that justice can be done to the work that we do and also that the patients will be satisfied. The primary motive of every orthodontist should be to treat the patient effectively and successfully with long lasting results. Thus the patients are to be assessed, using an appropriate method. PAR index was developed in the recent years to evaluate the treatment results and it is considered as a simple, objective and a reliable manner for evaluating the stability after orthodontic treatment. The index can be applied to different components of the dentition and scores are applied to each component after which the individual scores are multiplied with their respective weightings to balance the impact of the individual components of the overall result. They are then summed up to establish an overall total. In this manner, the method was carried out for the study casts of the three different phases of the treatment i.e. before the onset of the treatment, immediately after treatment and 2 years after treatment for assessing the stability after orthodontic treatment.

scholarly journals The Use of Technology in the Management of Orthodontic Treatment-Related Pain

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Anand Marya ◽  
Adith Venugopal
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Behavior Modification ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Indirect Bonding ◽  
Orthodontic Pain ◽  
Virtual Treatment Planning ◽  
Virtual Treatment

Orthodontic pain is one of the negatives associated with fixed orthodontic treatment that cannot be avoided. This pain usually comes around the wire placement period and gradually decreases once the endogenous analgesic mechanisms start functioning. Over the years, several treatment modalities have been utilized for relief from orthodontic pain, and these include mechanical, behavior modification, and pharmacological methods. However, in the last decade, there are several newer methods employing the use of technology that have come up and are being used for alleviating pain. From computerized indirect bonding to virtual treatment planning, technology has slowly become a vital part of an orthodontist’s repertoire. The digital age is here, and orthodontics must embrace the use of technology to help improve the quality of life of patients.

scholarly journals Time-saving scoring chart for the American Board of Orthodontics’ objective grading system

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 262-265
Author(s):  
Pratap Saini ◽  
Raj Kumar Maurya ◽  
Harpreet Singh
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Care ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Grading System ◽  
Time Saving ◽  
Treatment Assessment ◽  
American Board Of Orthodontics ◽  
Objective Grading System

Objective grading system is indispensable in contemporary orthodontic scenario to help elevate clinical proficiency and quality of care. Simplification of the format of grading system is necessary not only for easy chair side documentation but also for comparative pre- and post treatment assessment. The aim of this article is to propose a simple, practical, and time-saving scoring chart for scoring each criterion of the objective grading system.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document