The index of orthognathic functional treatment need accurately prioritises those patients already selected for orthognathic surgery within the NHS

Impact of patient age on the functional and psychosocial outcomes of orthognathic treatment

Orthognathic treatment has been demonstrated to enhance oral function and quality of life. In the UK, prior approval criteria have been trialled to govern the provision of orthognathic surgery within the National Health Service (NHS). These include the patient's age and presence of functional concerns. The purpose of this paper was to examine the outcomes of orthognathic treatment with respect to patient age at the start of treatment. This was a retrospective evaluation of a single surgeon's experience of patients treated for dentofacial deformity over a 17-year period. A total of 118 patients completed pre-treatment and post-treatment questionnaires. There were significant improvements (p < 0.001) in reported functional problems, and in Body Satisfaction Scale (BSS), General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12), and in Anxiety questionnaire scores. There was no difference in outcome when younger and older patients were compared. Orthognathic treatment produced positive functional and psychosocial outcomes irrespective of the patient's age at the start of treatment.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Need for Detecting Subjects with Great Need for Orthognathic Surgery

Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Need (IOFTN) Identifies patients with greatest need for orthognathic surgery. This systematic review looks into the available evidence on prevalence of patients with great treatment need (IOFTN 4&5) who had orthognathic surgery in previous studies. Literature search of the major electronic databases was carried out for articles published between 2014 and September 2023, looking for "Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Need","Orthognathic Surgery","IOFTN", "Epidemiology" and "Dentofacial Deformity". The prevalence of patients identified with IOFTN grades of 4&5 was calculated. A random-effect model was employed and the Forest and Galbraith plots were produced. The pooled prevalence estimate for subjects with IOFTN scores of 4&5 was calculated. The heterogeneity among studies was assessed with the I2 statistics. In total, 14 retrospective studies conducted between 2015 and 2019 in 7 countries (UK, New Zealand, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Malaysia, Japan) were included, reporting on 1339 orthognathic patients. The sample sizes ranged from 30 to 200. Only 7 studies reported on the subcategories of the IOFTN for grades 1, 2&3. The prevalence of orthognathic patients with IOFTN scores of 4 & 5 ranged from 79% to 100%. The heterogeneity I2 statistics was high (76%, random effects model) for 14 studies, but after removing 3 outlier studies reduced to zero. The pooled prevalence estimate for subjects with IOFTN scores of 4&5 was 93% (95% CI, 0.91-0.94%). According to this meta-analysis, IOFTN successfully identified 93% of patients who underwent orthognathic surgery with a great need for treatment (Grade 4 & 5). To enhance the identification of patients with well-compensated malocclusions, previous orthodontic treatment, or extreme occlusal deviations (e.g., proclination or retroclination of incisors), it would be advantageous to employ additional means alongside IOFTN for assessing orthognathic need in this group.

National British Orthodontic Society (BOS) Orthognathic Audit 2017–2018

Objective:

To carry out a UK national clinical audit of orthognathic acceptance criteria and information provided to orthognathic patients before treatment.

Design:

National clinical audit.

Setting:

Data collected using Bristol Online Surveys.

Participants:

Sixty-nine UK hospital orthodontic departments submitted data.

Methods:

Data were collected at two time points using Bristol Online Surveys over a period of 12 months. These were before treatment at the first multidisciplinary clinic (MDT) and immediately after surgery. The data collected included: Index of Orthognathic Functional Treatment Need (IOFTN); Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN); age; previous orthodontic treatment; attendance at an MDT; treatment times; and information provision.

Results:

Eighty-five units agreed to take part in the audit with 69 submitting data, giving a response rate of 81%. The data from 3404 patients were uploaded, 2263 before treatment and 1141 immediately after surgery. Of patients, 91.07% had an IOFTN score of 4 or 5 and 88.73% had an IOTN score of 4 or 5. The mean age at the first MDT was 22 years in the first cohort and 21 years and 4 months in the second immediate post-surgery cohort. Of patients, 37.93% had undergone some form of previous orthodontic treatment, but only 0.28% had undergone previous orthognathic treatment; 96.93% had an MDT confirm that orthodontic treatment by itself was insufficient to adequately correct their functional symptoms. The average treatment time from bond up to surgery was 2 years and 6 months. With respect to information provision, patients received information from a number of sources, principally the British Orthodontic Society (BOS) patient information leaflets and the BOS website Your Jaw Surgery.

Conclusions:

In the UK, the majority of orthognathic cases fulfil the criteria for acceptance for NHS-funded orthognathic treatment, as outlined by the Chief Dental Officer’s interim guidance on orthognathic treatment. This suggests any prior approval process would not be a good use of NHS resources in the commissioning of orthognathic treatment.