Orthodontic Treatment Provided by General Dentists with Different Types of Appliances in Chattishgarh, India

Objective: To determine the most desired lip profile and compare the subjective sense of aesthetics among orthodontists, general dentists and the general population. Method: The cross-sectional study was conducted at the Orthodontic Department of the Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, from January 1 to February 25, 2020, and comprised different silhouettes for each gender with increasing lip procumbence from -6mm to +6mm with respect to Rickett’s E-line which were created using Photoshop CS 8.0 after cephalometric analysis of 20 cephalograms. The sample comprised an equal number of orthodontists in group A, general dentists in group B and orthodontic treatment-seekers in group C with equal representation of the two genders. Data was analysed using SPSS 24. Results: Of the 180 subjects, there were 60(33.3%) in each of the three groups, with 30(50%) males and as many females in all the groups. All the three groups preferred the average lip profile for males (p=0.018) and 2mm procumbent lips for females (p=0.008). There was significant difference of opinion between groups A and C (p=0.034) and between groups B and C (p=0.022). Conclusion: There was found to be a marked difference of opinion among the orthodontists, the general dentists and the orthodontic treatment-seekers regarding the desired lip profile. Key Words: Aesthetics, Pakistani population, Cephalometrics, Lip profile. Continuous...

Download Full-text

Orthodontic Treatment Knowledge among General Dentists and Non-orthodontic Specialists

Orthodontic Journal of Nepal ◽

10.3126/ojn.v9i1.25689 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 40-44

Author(s):

Asal Acharya ◽

Praveen Mishra ◽

Rabindra Man Shrestha ◽

Pooja Shah

Keyword(s):

Orthodontic Treatment ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Multiple Choice Questions ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Treatment Knowledge ◽

Treatment Concepts ◽

The Mean ◽

General Dentists

Introduction: General dentists and specialists other than orthodontist may encounter patient requiring orthodontic treatment. For proper counseling and referral, it is important that general dentists and non-orthodontic specialists have adequate level of orthodontic knowledge. Objective: To assess the knowledge of orthodontic treatment among general dentists and non-orthodontic specialists and to compare the knowledge between the two groups. Materials & Method: A descriptive cross sectional study using questionnaire was performed among 185 actively practicing general dentists and non-orthodontic specialists of Nepal. The questionnaire comprised of three parts. The first part included demographic details, second part contained 5 multiple choice questions regarding orthodontic counseling and third part integrated 18 questions for evaluating knowledge of orthodontic treatment. Each correct answer was given score 1 and every incorrect answer was scored zero in the third part of the questionnaire. Result: Among total participants, 60.5% think first orthodontic evaluation of a child should be carried out within 7 to 8 years of age and 44.3% think orthodontic treatment can even be started after 40 years of age. Around 66% of the participants think that orthodontic treatment cannot be performed in periodontally compromised cases. No significant difference was found between the mean scores of knowledge among general dentists and non-orthodontic specialists (p=0.891), or among dentists with different years of experience (p=0.644). Conclusion: There is a need for more education of orthodontic treatment concepts to the dentists who do not belong to orthodontic field for proper counseling and referral.

Download Full-text

Orthodontic treatment provided by general dentists who have achieved master’s level in the Academy of General Dentistry

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics ◽

10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.10.018 ◽

2006 ◽

Vol 129 (5) ◽

pp. 678-686 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Robert N. Galbreath ◽

Kelly K. Hilgers ◽

Anibal M. Silveira ◽

James P. Scheetz

Keyword(s):

Orthodontic Treatment ◽

Master's Level ◽

General Dentists

Download Full-text

Do various degrees of tooth decalcification affect orthodontists', general dentists' and laypersons' ratings of smile esthetics?

The Angle Orthodontist ◽

10.2319/080619/515.1 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 90 (3) ◽

pp. 405-410

Author(s):

Iyad Al-Omari ◽

Zaid Al-Bitar ◽

Ahmad M. Hamdan

Keyword(s):

Visual Analogue Scale ◽

Analogue Scale ◽

Orthodontic Treatment ◽

White Spot ◽

White Spot Lesions ◽

Matched Sample ◽

Anterior Teeth ◽

General Dentists ◽

Smile Esthetics ◽

Study Participants

ABSTRACT Objectives To compare the effect of various degrees of decalcification after orthodontic treatment (white spot lesions) on orthodontists', general dentists', and laypersons' ratings of smile esthetics. Materials and Methods Eight photographs representing incrementally altered tooth decalcification lesions of maxillary anterior teeth ranging from mild to severe were shown randomly to the study participants. Photographs were rated by a matched sample of orthodontists (N = 42), general dentists (N = 52), and laypeople (N = 58). A visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess perceptions of smile esthetics. Results The three groups of raters could distinguish between different decalcification levels. Raters gave more negative scores as the decalcification level increased. Conclusions The three groups of raters were able to distinguish between various degrees of decalcification lesions. General dentists were the most critical of all groups when rating decalcification lesions.

Download Full-text

Treatment for the young child

International Journal of Orofacial Myology ◽

10.52010/ijom.1988.14.1.7 ◽

1988 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 33-39

Author(s):

Roberta Pierce ◽

Keyword(s):

Young Child ◽

Orthodontic Treatment ◽

Normal Growth ◽

Point Of View ◽

Oral Environment ◽

General Dentists ◽

Tongue Thrust ◽

Age Range ◽

Additional Therapy ◽

Rest Posture

Summary: The large majority of patients referred to orofacial myologists have been, and will continue to be, in the 10 to 15 year age range, primarily because this is the age when most individuals begin orthodontic treatment. As more pedodontists and general dentists have become aware of developing malocclusions, and the possible detrimental effects of tongue and lip-resting posture and tongue thrust swallowing, there has been an increase in the number of young children referred from a preventive point of view. Guidelines have been provided to enable the orofacial myologist to function as a member of a team in determining the best course of treatment for each child. There are certainly instances in whichmedical management, surgical intervention or orthodontic treatment are indicated. These recommendations should be made by the dental specialist, perhaps in consultation with the orofacial myologist. There are other instances in which therapy for tongue thrust or rest-posture therapy are indicated. With the young child, we can afford to take the more conservative approach - rest posture therapy - because there is sufficient time later to do additional therapy if needed. The overall goal is to create as normal an oral environment as possible so as to facilitate normal growth and development. Correcting the resting posture of the tongue and lips also improves the cosmetic appearance and enhances the opportunity for good occlusion.

Download Full-text

Assessment of the Diagnostic Skills of General Dentists in Different Types of Orthodontic Malocclusions

10.5152/turkjorthod.2021.20087 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 34 (3) ◽

pp. 189-198

Author(s):

Hanife Nuray Yilmaz ◽

◽

Elvan Onem Ozbilen ◽

Gulden Karabiber ◽

◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Skills ◽

Different Types ◽

General Dentists

Download Full-text

Quality of orthodontic treatment performed by orthodontists and general dentists

The Angle Orthodontist ◽

10.2319/061311-389.1 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 82 (1) ◽

pp. 102-106 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

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.

Download Full-text

The effect of root and bone visualization on perceptions of the quality of orthodontic treatment simulations

The Angle Orthodontist ◽

10.2319/082416-634.1 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 87 (3) ◽

pp. 384-390 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Thorsten Grünheid ◽

Danae C. Kirk ◽

Brent E. Larson

Keyword(s):

Orthodontic Treatment ◽

Online Survey ◽

Diagnostic Information ◽

Cone Beam ◽

Analog Scale ◽

Arch Form ◽

Planning Decisions ◽

Quality Ratings ◽

Different Types

ABSTRACTObjective:To evaluate the effect of root and bone visibility on orthodontists' perceptions of the quality of treatment simulations.Material and Methods:An online survey was used to present orthodontists with setups generated for 10 patients in two different types of view: with and without bone and roots as modeled from a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan. The orthodontists were asked to rate the quality of the setups from poor to ideal on a 100-point visual analog scale and, if applicable, to identify features of concern that led them to giving a setup a less-than-ideal rating.Results:The quality ratings were significantly lower when roots and bone were visible in the setups (P < .0001). Buccolingual inclination and periodontal concerns were selected significantly more often as reasons for a less-than-ideal rating when roots and bone were shown, whereas occlusal relationship, overjet, occlusal contacts, and arch form were selected significantly more often as reasons for a less-than-ideal rating when roots and bone were not shown. The odds of selecting periodontal concerns as a reason for a less-than-ideal setup rating were 331 times greater when roots and bones were visible than when they were not.Conclusions:Additional diagnostic information derived from CBCT scans affects orthodontists' perceptions of the overall case quality, which may influence their treatment-planning decisions.

Download Full-text