Evaluation of objective and subjective treatment outcomes in orthodontic cases treated with extraction of a mandibular incisor.
Dental attractiveness
Extractions
Mandibular incisor
PAR
Journal
The Angle orthodontist
ISSN: 1945-7103
Titre abrégé: Angle Orthod
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0370550
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 2019
11 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
13
6
2019
medline:
11
2
2020
entrez:
13
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To analyze changes in occlusal characteristics following mandibular incisor extractions (MIE), to determine the usefulness of wax setups in treatment planning MIE cases and to compare the pre- and posttreatment dental attractiveness between MIE cases and nonextraction (NE) controls. The Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index was used to score pre- and posttreatment dental casts of MIE cases (n = 14) and matched NE controls (n = 14). Occlusal characteristics were evaluated on diagnostic wax setups and posttreatment casts. Attractiveness of pre- and posttreatment cases judged on intraoral photographs of cases (n = 6) and controls (n = 6) were rated by 76 dental students and 10 laypeople using visual analogue scales (VAS). The difference in PAR score reduction (%) between the MIE and NE groups was not significant. Between the wax setup and posttreatment casts, there were moderate correlations in overjet, overbite, and right canine classification. There was no significant difference in pre- and posttreatment change in VAS scores (%) for attractiveness between the MIE (49.8 ± 4.3 [S.E.]) and control groups (40.8 ± 4.3 [S.E.]). However, there was a significant difference ( There were no significant differences in the treatment outcomes of orthodontic cases treated with MIE or NE, indicating that MIE is a valid treatment option. A wax setup is moderately correlated with posttreatment results. Both laypeople and dental students rated posttreatment dental attractiveness higher than pretreatment in MIE and NE groups. Dental students tended to be more critical than laypeople in their ratings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31187629
doi: 10.2319/011018-25.1
pmc: PMC8109168
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
862-867Références
Eur J Orthod. 1992 Apr;14(2):125-39
pubmed: 1582457
Eur J Dent. 2007 Jan;1(1):54-9
pubmed: 19212499
Eur J Orthod. 1997 Jun;19(3):279-88
pubmed: 9239958
J Clin Orthod. 1993 Mar;27(3):153-60
pubmed: 8496354
Am J Orthod. 1977 Nov;72(5):560-7
pubmed: 270288
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Jan;139(1):49-54
pubmed: 21195276
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994 Feb;105(2):107-16
pubmed: 8311032
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Apr;151(4):685-690
pubmed: 28364891
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Feb;115(2):113-24
pubmed: 9971920
Angle Orthod. 2012 Jul;82(4):732-8
pubmed: 22149662
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 Mar;111(3):253-9
pubmed: 9082846
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987 Aug;92(2):94-7
pubmed: 3475973
J Dent (Tehran). 2012 Winter;9(1):27-34
pubmed: 22924099
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000 Jul;118(1):107-13
pubmed: 10893480
Eur J Orthod. 1992 Jun;14(3):180-7
pubmed: 1628684
Angle Orthod. 2012 Sep;82(5):806-11
pubmed: 22352381
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 Nov;108(5):533-41
pubmed: 7484973
Eur J Orthod. 1996 Oct;18(5):485-9
pubmed: 8942098
Angle Orthod. 1992 Summer;62(2):103-16
pubmed: 1626744
Eur J Orthod. 2012 Dec;34(6):681-5
pubmed: 21745824
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343
Angle Orthod. 2001 Jun;71(3):164-9
pubmed: 11407767
J Esthet Restor Dent. 2013 Dec;25(6):392-401
pubmed: 24180675
Angle Orthod. 1984 Apr;54(2):139-53
pubmed: 6588770