Malocclusion and oral health-related quality of life among young Danish adults. Is there a difference between subjects who received orthodontic treatment during adolescence and subjects without treatment need? A cross-sectional study

Early orthodontic treatment in a Finnish public health centre: a retrospective cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this observational cross-sectional one-centre study was to assess whether the previously described national orthodontic treatment practises and international recommendations are implemented in a public health care centre in Finland. We also assessed early treatment practices and appliances used.

METHODS

The study group comprised 801 children born in 2011 and 2012 residing in the Riihimäki health centre catchment area in Finland, representing 80% of the age cohort. The patient records were examined for data on orthodontic treatment, timing of treatment, appliances used, and occlusal traits.

RESULTS

The children had been examined by four orthodontist specialists and two orthodontic postgraduate students. Mean age at occlusal examination had been 9 years. Of the children, 212 (26%) were undergoing or had undergone orthodontic treatment. An additional 4.4% were scheduled for treatment. The proportion of children deemed to need treatment was significantly different between the different orthodontists. The most frequently used appliances were quad-helix (30%), eruption guidance appliance (20%), head gear (14%), fixed appliances (10%), protraction facemask (10%), and passive mandibular lingual arch (6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of children aged less than 12 years in the health centre were currently or had been in orthodontic treatment. Approximately half had received treatment with either quad-helix or eruption guidance appliance.

Does quality of orthodontic treatment outcome influence post-treatment stability? A retrospective study investigating short-term stability 2 years after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and in the presence of fixed retainers

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to evaluate stability 2 years after orthodontic treatment and to investigate the influence of various pre-treatment and post-treatment prognostic factors on stability.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

Consecutive patients treated with full fixed appliance and retained with fixed retainers were retrospectively assessed for eligibility.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Digital models were analysed at treatment start (T0), end of treatment (T1) and 2 years post-treatment (T2). The Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index, Little's Irregularity Index (LII), arch width and length, overjet, overbite and presence of unexpected post-treatment changes were assessed. Multiple regression analyses were conducted to model the relationship of all outcomes with several prognostics simultaneously.

RESULTS

The sample consisted of 287 subjects (mean treatment time: 25.1 months, standard deviation [SD] 7.5; mean post-treatment follow-up: 27.5 months, SD 6.1) with a mean weighted PAR score of 29.5 (SD 8.6) at T0, 1.8 (SD 2.9) at T1 and 3.2 (SD 3.6) at T2. At T1, 95% of the subjects had a perfect LII versus 86% at T2. An increased LII at T1 correlated with increased LII and PAR changes from T1 to T2. PAR at T1 as well as overjet at T0 was a significant prognostic factor for PAR at T2. At T2, five cases (1.7%) showed unexpected post-treatment changes related to fixed retainers.

CONCLUSION

Short-term post-treatment stability with fixed retainers was very good. Prognostic factors for stability included LII and PAR at T1, suggesting that high-quality treatment outcome in the presence of fixed retainers may ensure post-treatment stability.