Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A long-term controlled follow-up study of objective treatment need on young adults treated with functional appliances.

A long-term controlled follow-up study of objective treatment need on young adults treated with... The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate the objective success rate of Class II malocclusion treatment with functional appliances five years after completion of treatment and 2) to compare the remaining objective treatment need with an untreated control group. Records of all listed patients between 18-20 years (n=1054) treated in a general practice were reviewed for the purpose of finding treatments with removable functional appliances. Among all subjects (n=61) who previously had been treated, 58 accepted to participate in the study.The test group was matched with an orthodontically untreated group with no history of objective treatment need. Clinical examination was performed and study casts and photos were taken from both groups.The objective treatment need was evaluated through clinical examination and study cast analysis with weighted Peer Assessment Rating index (wPAR). Twenty patients, (34.5%) (mean wPAR 13.8), succeeded with the functional appliance treatment.The wPAR score (mean 15.0) of the entire test group was significantly higher than the one of the control group (mean 7.3).The group that was treated exclusively with functional appliances had a mean wPAR score of 17.4. Eighteen patients (31.0%) who received retreatment with fixed appliances had a slightly higher mean wPAR (8.6) than the control group. Treatments with functional appliances in a general practice showed a high failure rate and a remaining treatment need. It is the treating dentist's responsibility to motivate the patient to cooperate to the treatment, because as it previously has been shown the treatment with functional appliances is a well-functioning treatment alternative with the cooperation of the patient being sufficient. It is also of importance, already before starting treatment, to estimate the child's cooperation ability and to avoid treatment with removable appliances if the child or parents are reluctant about such a treatment. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Swedish dental journal Pubmed

A long-term controlled follow-up study of objective treatment need on young adults treated with functional appliances.

Swedish dental journal , Volume 38 (1): 8 – May 4, 2016

A long-term controlled follow-up study of objective treatment need on young adults treated with functional appliances.


Abstract

The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate the objective success rate of Class II malocclusion treatment with functional appliances five years after completion of treatment and 2) to compare the remaining objective treatment need with an untreated control group. Records of all listed patients between 18-20 years (n=1054) treated in a general practice were reviewed for the purpose of finding treatments with removable functional appliances. Among all subjects (n=61) who previously had been treated, 58 accepted to participate in the study.The test group was matched with an orthodontically untreated group with no history of objective treatment need. Clinical examination was performed and study casts and photos were taken from both groups.The objective treatment need was evaluated through clinical examination and study cast analysis with weighted Peer Assessment Rating index (wPAR). Twenty patients, (34.5%) (mean wPAR 13.8), succeeded with the functional appliance treatment.The wPAR score (mean 15.0) of the entire test group was significantly higher than the one of the control group (mean 7.3).The group that was treated exclusively with functional appliances had a mean wPAR score of 17.4. Eighteen patients (31.0%) who received retreatment with fixed appliances had a slightly higher mean wPAR (8.6) than the control group. Treatments with functional appliances in a general practice showed a high failure rate and a remaining treatment need. It is the treating dentist's responsibility to motivate the patient to cooperate to the treatment, because as it previously has been shown the treatment with functional appliances is a well-functioning treatment alternative with the cooperation of the patient being sufficient. It is also of importance, already before starting treatment, to estimate the child's cooperation ability and to avoid treatment with removable appliances if the child or parents are reluctant about such a treatment.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/pubmed/a-long-term-controlled-follow-up-study-of-objective-treatment-need-on-tA7PlV0SIs

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

ISSN
0347-9994
pmid
26995810

Abstract

The aims of this study were to 1) evaluate the objective success rate of Class II malocclusion treatment with functional appliances five years after completion of treatment and 2) to compare the remaining objective treatment need with an untreated control group. Records of all listed patients between 18-20 years (n=1054) treated in a general practice were reviewed for the purpose of finding treatments with removable functional appliances. Among all subjects (n=61) who previously had been treated, 58 accepted to participate in the study.The test group was matched with an orthodontically untreated group with no history of objective treatment need. Clinical examination was performed and study casts and photos were taken from both groups.The objective treatment need was evaluated through clinical examination and study cast analysis with weighted Peer Assessment Rating index (wPAR). Twenty patients, (34.5%) (mean wPAR 13.8), succeeded with the functional appliance treatment.The wPAR score (mean 15.0) of the entire test group was significantly higher than the one of the control group (mean 7.3).The group that was treated exclusively with functional appliances had a mean wPAR score of 17.4. Eighteen patients (31.0%) who received retreatment with fixed appliances had a slightly higher mean wPAR (8.6) than the control group. Treatments with functional appliances in a general practice showed a high failure rate and a remaining treatment need. It is the treating dentist's responsibility to motivate the patient to cooperate to the treatment, because as it previously has been shown the treatment with functional appliances is a well-functioning treatment alternative with the cooperation of the patient being sufficient. It is also of importance, already before starting treatment, to estimate the child's cooperation ability and to avoid treatment with removable appliances if the child or parents are reluctant about such a treatment.

Journal

Swedish dental journalPubmed

Published: May 4, 2016

There are no references for this article.