Article

Long-term occlusal and soft-tissue profile outcomes after treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with fixed appliances.

Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust, Department of Orthodontics, Edinburgh University Postgraduate Dental Institute, Edinburgh, Scotland.
American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics: official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics (Impact Factor: 1.33). 03/2011; 139(3):362-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.05.035
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Our objective was to determine which factors were predictive of good long-term outcomes after fixed appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion.
Two hundred seven patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion were examined in early adulthood at a mean of 4.6 years after treatment with fixed appliances. The peer assessment rating index was used to evaluate dental alignment and occlusal relationships. The soft-tissue profile was assessed with the Holdaway angle.
Logistic regression identified 3 pretreatment variables that were predictive of a good facial profile (Holdaway angle) at recall: the lower lip to E-plane distance (P <0.001; smaller distance behind the E-plane means a better outcome), ANB angle (P = 0.001; smaller ANB means a better outcome), and extraction pattern (P = 0.026). Linear regression analysis showed that 2 pretreatment variables were predictive of a favorable PAR score at recall: SNB angle (P = 0.001; larger SNB means a better outcome) and extraction pattern (P = 0.034).
Three pretreatment cephalometric measures (lower lip to E-plane distance, ANB angle, and SNB angle) were predictive of the outcome in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion. The extraction pattern was also found to be a predictor of outcome.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
53 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study investigated the influence of changing lower face vertical proportion on the attractiveness ratings scored by lay people.Ninety-two social science students rated the attractiveness of a series of silhouettes with normal, reduced or increased lower face proportions. The random sequences of 10 images included an image with the Eastman normal lower face height relative to total face height [lower anterior face height/total anterior face height (LAFH/TAFH) of 55 per cent], and images with LAFH/TAFH increased or decreased by up to four standard deviations (SD) from the Eastman norm. All the images had a skeletal Class I antero-posterior (AP) relationship. A duplicate image in each sequence assessed repeatability. The participants scored each image using a 10 point numerical scale and also indicated whether they would seek treatment if the image was their own profile. The profile image with normal vertical facial proportions was rated by the lay people as the most attractive. Attractiveness scores reduced as the vertical facial proportions diverged from the normal value. Images with a reduced lower face proportion were rated as significantly more attractive than the corresponding images with an increased lower face proportion. Images with a reduced lower face proportion were also significantly less likely to be judged as needing treatment than the corresponding images with an increased lower face proportion.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 09/2005; 27(4):349-54. · 1.08 Impact Factor