Fixed appliance orthodontic treatment duration in Brunei Darussalam.
- Author:
Grace ANG
;
Uday Kumar UMESAN
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Malocclusions, orthodontic anchorage procedures, orthodontic appliances, orthodontic corrective
- From:Brunei International Medical Journal
2011;7(2):78-87
- CountryBrunei Darussalam
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Introduction: Fixed appliance orthodontic treatment (braces) is routinely used to address mal-positions of teeth and create esthetic smiles. Although it is desirable that treatment not exceed two years but, in practice, duration of up to two-and-a-half years is deemed acceptable. This review was undertaken to determine treatment duration for routine state-funded fixed appliance treatment in Brunei Darussalam and identify possible influencing factors. Materials and Methods: 100 consecutive cases (Malocclusion class I [29%], II [51%] and III [20%]) of completed routine, single-phase fixed appliance treatment treated at the National Dental Centre, Bandar Seri Begawan, selected retrospectively from 31st December 2008 were reviewed for treatment duration including possible factors affecting this parameter. Results: Only 19% had desirable treatment duration (≤2 years) and 41% had acceptable treatment duration (2.01 to 2.5 years). Forty percent had treatment duration in excess of 2.5 years. Excess time due to accumulative non-optimal visit intervals, and number of adjustment visits showed significant high correlation coefficient values to treatment duration (p<0.01). Extractions showed low but significant correlation to treatment duration while age revealed low negative correlation to treatment duration (p<0.05). The lowest incidence of repairs occurred in those whose treatment did not exceed two years whilst the highest incidence of broken appointments was observed in those who had treatment duration in excess of three years. Conclusions: This retrospective review indicates that treatment duration for most of our sample is longer than desirable. The accumulative effect of non-optimal visit intervals, increased number of adjustment visits, age at start of treatment, high proportion of extraction cases, increased incidence of repairs and broken appointments may be contributory. Further investigations including prospective studies are required.
