An Approach to Appliance Therapy

1974 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 191-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. E. Mills ◽  
Katherine W. L. Vig
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Short Series ◽  
Combined Use ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Removable Appliances

This is the first of a short series of articles in which it is proposed to review various types of appliance treatment available to the orthodontist. In the present article the simpler forms of treatment are considered; treatment without orthodontic appliances or with removable appliances only. In future article consideration will be given to the combined use of removable and fixed appliances, and finally of the more advanced, wholly fixed techniques.

scholarly journals Determination of Most Frequent Emergencies in Patients with Fixed and Removable Orthodontic Appliances at Tertiary Care Dental Hospital

2022 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-74
Author(s):  
Syed Salman Shah ◽  
Kawish Syed ◽  
Zafar Ul islam ◽  
Shahab Adil
Keyword(s):  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Fixed Appliance ◽  
Dental Hospital ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Removable Appliances ◽  
Removable Orthodontic Appliances

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of emergencies in patients with fixed and removable orthodontic appliances at tertiary care dental hospital. METHODOLOGY: A questionnaire was designed for this descriptive cross-sectional study to be filled by the clinician (L3/L4 FCPS resident) at the end of addressing every orthodontic emergency. Sampling was done under consecutive non-probability protocols. Descriptive statistics were applied to determine the frequency of different orthodontic emergencies, and Pearson’s chi-square test was applied to determine association of emergencies with gender and etiology of emergency (patient related vs operator related). Data was analyzed on SPSS version 20. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients reported with orthodontic emergencies. The sample comprised 38.3% males and 61.7% females. Most frequent orthodontic emergency reported was deboned brackets in fixed appliances, while the most common emergency in removable appliances was traumatic PNAM. A statistically significant association (Pearson’s Chi Square=4.74, Cramer’s V=0.165, p=0.029) was seen for removable and fixed appliance emergencies with males and females. CONCLUSION: Most frequent fixed appliance orthodontic emergencies were deboned brackets while for removable appliance emergencies were trauma due to PNAM. Emergencies with removable appliances were mostly due to the operator related factors, while in fixed appliances patient related factors were dominating.

Orthodontics

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Longridge ◽  
Pete Clarke ◽  
Raheel Aftab ◽  
Tariq Ali
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Maxillofacial Surgery ◽  
Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Normal Occlusion ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Face ◽  
Functional Appliances ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Removable Appliances

Orthodontics is ‘the specialty of dentistry concerned with growth of the face, the development of dentition, and the prevention and correction of occlusal anomalies. A malocclusion can be defined as ‘a deviation from the ideal that may be aesthetically or functionally unsatisfactory, with a wide range of occlusal traits’. Orthodontics is a constantly evolving specialty, with ever changing principles and techniques continuing to be developed. There has been huge progress in orthodontics in recent times, with changes in the types of brackets, archwire materials, and appliance systems (such as tem­porary anchorage devices and aligner technology). The key principles of orthodontics date back to 1899 when Edward Angle described ‘the key to a normal occlusion as the anteropos­terior relationship between the upper and lower first molars’. In 1972, Lawrence Andrews described ‘six keys to an ideal static occlusion’. This was the basis of early orthodontic treatment planning. Knowledge of craniofacial development and growth is required as a foundation for understanding the aetiology of a patient’s malocclusion, to reach a diagnosis, and to plan orthodontic treatment. A basic under­standing of the types of orthodontic appliances is beneficial (mainly fixed appliances, functional appliances, some use of removable appliances, and retainers). In addition to the management of a malocclusion, orthodontic treat­ment is often required in conjunction with other specialties, including oral and maxillofacial surgery, paediatric and restorative dentistry Key topics discussed in this chapter include: ● Fixed appliances ● Functional appliances ● Removable appliances ● Retention ● Index of treatment need ● Orthodontic assessment and diagnosis ● Cephalometric analysis ● Malocclusion ● Ectopic canines ● Dental anomalies.

An Approach to Appliance Therapy—Part II

1975 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. E. Mills ◽  
Katherine W. L. Vig
Keyword(s):  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Short Series ◽  
Dental Hospital ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Removable Appliances

This is the second of a short series of papers illustrating appliance therapy in use at the Eastman Dental Hospital, London. In this paper we describe the use of removable appliances for the earlier stages of tooth movement, progressing gradually to the use of banded fixed appliances, using 0·018 in.×0·025 in. twin edgewise brackets, for the later, more sophisticated stages of treatment.

An Approach to Appliance Therapy—Part III

1975 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. R. E. Mills ◽  
Katherine W. L. Vig
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Comprehensive Review ◽  
Short Series ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Final Article

This article completes our short series in which we have reviewed various types of appliance therapy. The present article considers the more advanced fixed appliances with special reference to the Begg and Edgewise techniques. Indications for the choice of fully banded appliances from the start of treatment are discussed. This final article in common with the preceding ones is not a comprehensive review of the whole range of fixed techniques available to the orthodontist but representative and illustrated by two case reports.

scholarly journals Duration of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances in adolescents and adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen Abbing ◽  
Vasiliki Koretsi ◽  
Theodore Eliades ◽  
Spyridon N. Papageorgiou
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Adult Patients ◽  
Comprehensive Treatment ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Duration Of Treatment ◽  
Quality Of Evidence ◽  
Fixed Appliances

Abstract Objectives Adults with fixed orthodontic appliances are increasing nowadays. Compared with adolescents, adults present biological differences that might influence treatment duration. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents. Materials and methods Eight databases were searched up to September 2019 for randomized and non-randomized clinical studies comparing treatment duration with fixed appliances in adolescents and adult patients. After duplicate study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment with the Cochrane ROBINS-I tool, random effects meta-analyses of mean differences (MD) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by assessment of the quality of evidence with GRADE. Results A total of 11 unique studies (one prospective and 10 retrospective non-randomized) with 2969 adolescents and 1380 adult patients were finally included. Meta-analysis of 7 studies found no significant difference in the duration of comprehensive treatment with fixed appliances (MD = − 0.8 month; 95% CI = − 4.2 to 2.6 months; P = 0.65; I2 = 92%) between adults and adolescents. Similarly, both distalization of upper first molars with skeletal anchorage for class II correction and the retraction of canines into the premolar extraction spaces lasted similarly long among adults and adolescents. On the other hand, alignment of palatally displaced canines lasted considerably longer in adults compared to adolescents (1 study; MD = 3.8 months; 95% CI = 1.4 to 6.2 months; P = 0.002). The quality of evidence for the meta-analysis was low due to the inclusion of non-randomized studies with considerable risk of bias. Conclusions While existing evidence does not indicate a difference in the overall duration of treatment with fixed appliances between adults and adolescents, the alignment of palatally displaced canines lasted significantly longer in adults. However, our confidence in these estimates is low due to the risk of bias in the included studies. Trial registration PROSPERO: (CRD42019148169)

scholarly journals Effects of fixed labial orthodontic appliances on speech sound production

2015 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 462-467 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan S. Paley ◽  
George J. Cisneros ◽  
Olivier F. Nicolay ◽  
Etoile M. LeBlanc
Keyword(s):  
Sound Production ◽  
Speech Sound ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Priority Index ◽  
Treatment Priority ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Objective:  To explore the impact of fixed labial orthodontic appliances on speech sound production. Materials and Methods:  Speech evaluations were performed on 23 patients with fixed labial appliances. Evaluations were performed immediately prior to appliance insertion, immediately following insertion, and 1 and 2 months post insertion. Baseline dental/skeletal variables were correlated with the ability to accommodate the presence of the appliances. Results:  Appliance effects were variable: 44% of the subjects were unaffected, 39% were temporarily affected but adapted within 2 months, and 17% of patients showed persistent sound errors at 2 months. Resolution of acquired sound errors was noted by 8 months post–appliance removal. Maladaptation to appliances was correlated to severity of malocclusion as determined by the Grainger’s Treatment Priority Index. Sibilant sounds, most notably /s/, were affected most often. Conclusions:  (1) Insertion of fixed labial appliances has an effect on speech sound production. (2) Sibilant and stopped sounds are affected, with /s/ being affected most often. (3) Accommodation to fixed appliances depends on the severity of malocclusion.

scholarly journals Long-term skeletal effects of high-pull headgear followed by fixed appliances for the treatment of Class II malocclusions

2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (5) ◽  
pp. 530-537
Author(s):  
E. Erin Bilbo ◽  
Steven D. Marshall ◽  
Karin A. Southard ◽  
Verrasathpurush Allareddy ◽  
Nathan Holton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Class I ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Skeletal Changes ◽  
Fixed Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Horizontal Growth ◽  
Skeletal Effects ◽  
Fixed Appliances

ABSTRACT Objectives: The long-term skeletal effects of Class II treatment in growing individuals using high-pull facebow headgear and fixed edgewise appliances have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term skeletal effects of treatment using high-pull headgear followed by fixed orthodontic appliances compared to an untreated control group. Materials and Methods: Changes in anteroposterior and vertical cephalometric measurements of 42 Class II subjects (n = 21, mean age = 10.7 years) before treatment, after headgear correction to Class I molar relationship, after treatment with fixed appliances, and after long-term retention (mean 4.1 years), were compared to similar changes in a matched control group (n = 21, mean age = 10.9 years) by multivariable linear regression models. Results: Compared to control, the study group displayed significant long-term horizontal restriction of A-point (SNA = −1.925°, P < .0001; FH-NA = −3.042°, P < .0001; linear measurement A-point to Vertical Reference = −3.859 mm, P < .0001) and reduction of the ANB angle (−1.767°, P < .0001), with no effect on mandibular horizontal growth or maxillary and mandibular vertical skeletal changes. A-point horizontal restriction and forward mandibular horizontal growth accompanied the study group correction to Class I molar, and these changes were stable long term. Conclusions: One phase treatment for Class II malocclusion with high-pull headgear followed by fixed orthodontic appliances resulted in correction to Class I molar through restriction of horizontal maxillary growth with continued horizontal mandibular growth and vertical skeletal changes unaffected. The anteroposterior molar correction and skeletal effects of this treatment were stable long term.

scholarly journals Microbiological Evaluation of Octenidine Dihydrochloride Mouth Rinse after 5 Days' Use in Orthodontic Patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (4) ◽  
pp. 766-772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alev Aksoy Dogan ◽  
Emel Sesli Cetin ◽  
Emad Hüssein ◽  
Ali Kudret Adiloglu
Keyword(s):  
Inhibitory Effect ◽  
Oral Bacteria ◽  
Lactobacillus Species ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Cariogenic Bacteria ◽  
Fixed Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Octenidine Dihydrochloride ◽  
Orthodontic Patients ◽  
Fixed Appliances

Abstract Objective: To determine the absolute and relative antibacterial activity of octenidine dihydrochloride (OCT) against total and cariogenic bacteria in saliva samples of patients with fixed orthodontic appliances during 5 days of usage. Materials and Methods: The study group consisted of 5 male and 13 female subjects who were selected from patients in the Clinic of Orthodontics. Each patient was given physiologic saline (PS), chlorhexidine gluconate (CHX), polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine complex (PVP-I), and OCT every morning for 5 days, each separated by a 2-week interval. Total and cariogenic bacteria in saliva samples of orthodontically treated patients with fixed appliances were collected during 5 days of usage. Unstimulated saliva was collected as a baseline sample. Saliva samples were collected at 15 minutes, and on the second, third, and fifth day after rinsing the mouth with any of the solutions for 30 seconds, and bacterial counts were detected. Results: OCT showed an ultimate reduction of total viable oral bacteria, Lactobacillus species, and Streptococcus mutans in vivo. OCT also had a significantly greater inhibitory effect than 0.2% CHX and 7.5% PVP-I, from the beginning of the study until the fifth day after the orthodontic appliances were bonded (P < .1). Conclusions: OCT compared favorably with respect to CHX and PVP-I complex in orthodontically treated patients with fixed appliances (P ≤ .1).

scholarly journals Pain, masticatory performance and swallowing threshold in orthodontic patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 117-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Porto Trein ◽  
Karina Santos Mundstock ◽  
Leonardo Maciel ◽  
Jaqueline Rachor ◽  
Gustavo Hauber Gameiro
Keyword(s):  
Particle Size ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Masticatory Performance ◽  
Threshold Test ◽  
Orthodontic Patients ◽  
Median Particle ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Baseline Values ◽  
Individual Capacity

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess pain, masticatory performance and swallowing threshold of patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. METHODS: Ten patients of both genders (mean age of 17.25 ± 5.21 years), with complete permanent dentition, who underwent orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances were evaluated. The masticatory performance and the swallowing threshold were assessed by patient's individual capacity of fragmenting an artificial test food (Optocal) which was chewed and had the resulting particles processed by a standardized sieving method, presenting the median particle size (MPS) of crushed units. The intensity of pain / discomfort during chewing was evaluated by means of a visual analog scale. All tests were performed at the following times: T0 - before activating the orthodontic appliance; T1 - 24 hours after activation, and T2 - 30 days after activation. RESULTS: The results showed a significant increase in pain at T1 (T0 - 0.60 ± 0.70 mm; T1 - 66.2 ± 34.5 mm), returning to baseline values at T2 (3.20 ± 3.82 mm). Masticatory performance was also reduced in T1 (MPS 10.15 ± 1.1 mm²) in comparison to T0 (MPS 7.01 ± 2.9 mm²) and T2 (MPS 6.76 ± 1.3 mm²). However, particle size was not affected in the swallowing threshold test (T0 - 5.47 ± 2.37 mm²; T1 - 6.19 ± 2.05 mm²; T2 - 5.94 ± 2.36 mm²). CONCLUSION: The orthodontic appliances did not interfere in the size of the particles that would be swallowed, even in the presence of pain.

scholarly journals The effect of removable orthodontic appliances on oral microbiota: systematic review

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Lucchese ◽  
Marianna Pellegrino ◽  
Eugenio Montini ◽  
Alessandra Liguori ◽  
Maurizio Manuelli
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Oral Microbiota ◽  
Periodontal Tissues ◽  
Ovid Medline ◽  
Registration Number ◽  
Pre Treatment ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Removable Appliances ◽  
Removable Orthodontic Appliances

Abstract Background Removable orthodontic appliances due to plaque accumulation and oral microbe colonization, might be associated with intraoral adverse effects on enamel or periodontal tissues. The present systematic review was carried out to evaluate both qualitatively and quantitatively the microbiological changes occurring during orthodontic therapy with removable orthodontic appliances. Methods PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid Medline, Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source and Vita-Salute San Raffaele University databases were searched. The research included every article published up to December 2018. The Preferred Reporting Items for Reporting Systematic reviews and Meta Analyses (PRISMA) protocol and the ‘Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care Criteria for Grading Assessed Studies’ (SBU) method were adopted to conduct this systematic review. Results The current study has moderate/high evidence, according with SBU method. It demonstrates that removable appliances do influence the oral microbiota, with significant alterations just 15 days after the beginning of therapy, independently from the type of appliance. Furthermore, the levels of oral pathogens decrease significantly or even returned to pre-treatment levels several months later the therapy end. Conclusions This review suggests that orthodontic treatment with removable appliances might not induce permanent changes to oral microflora. Protocol: PROSPERO database registration number CRD42019121762.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document