Fixed orthodontic treatment has been compromised at many levels during the pandemic period, as clinics underwent a prolonged lockdown and patients could not be treated regularly. With the end of the pandemic nowhere in sight, may be it is time to put newer tools, such as clear aligner therapy, for better use. Fixed orthodontic appliances by nature are not always self-limiting, which, if left unmonitored over a long period may cause undesirable side effects, pain, and discomfort. The undesired tooth movements that may occur with arch wire-guided mechanics in addition to problems with cut wires or removed brackets may be minimized with the use of aligners. While the benefits of using aligners are for all to see, they do require extensive planning and careful evaluation of the progress. This article reviews the advantages of using aligners during the pandemic period and how it can be beneficial in helping orthodontists resume their practice.
This case report illustrates the successful management of a case of mutilated maxillary incisors in a 13 year old patient through a sequence of therapy designed to closely coordinate the various disciplines, endodontics, restorative dentistry and orthodontics, involved. Endodontics was directed towards the control of the infected pulp, restorative treatment was to reconstruct the broken down teeth in stages which were essential in the sequence of treatment, and orthodontics was involved in the achievement of functional occlusion and alignment. The comprehensive treatment approach combined to achieve satisfactory aesthetics and function.
Orthodontic treatment in adults has gained social and professional acceptance in recent years. An assessment of orthodontic treatment need helps to identify individuals who will benefit from treatment and safeguard their interest. The purpose of this study was to assess the objective and subjective levels of orthodontic treatment need in a sample of orthodontically untreated adult Asian males. A sample of male army recruits (n = 339, age 17-22 years, Chinese = 258, Malay = 60, Indian = 21) with no history of orthodontic treatment or craniofacial anomalies participated in the study on a voluntary basis with informed consent. Impressions for study models were taken. Objective treatment need was assessed based on study model analysis using the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN). Questionnaires were used to assess subjective treatment need based on subjective esthetic component (EC) ratings. Fifty percentage of the sample had a definite need for orthodontic treatment (dental health component [DHC] grades 4 and 5), whereas 29.2% had a moderate need for treatment (DHC grades 3). The occlusal trait most commonly identified was dental crossbite. Malay males had the highest percentage with a definite need for treatment for both dental health and esthetic reasons in comparison with Chinese and Indian males. However, there was no difference in the level of treatment need among the ethnic groups (P > .05). No correlation between objective and subjective EC scores was found (P > .05). A high level of investigator-identified treatment need was not supported by a similar level of subject awareness among the adult sample.