Traditional treatment planning methods have been the backbone of medical practice for many years. These methods typically involve a combination of clinical examinations, two-dimensional (2D) imaging techniques such as X-rays, and sometimes basic computer tomography (CT) scans. While these approaches have significantly advanced healthcare, they come with notable limitations that have spurred the exploration of more sophisticated methods, such as 3D imaging.
One of the primary traditional methods is the use of X-rays. X-rays provide a quick and relatively inexpensive way to view the internal structures of the body. However, they offer limited detail and are two-dimensional, which can lead to misinterpretation of the spatial relationships between structures. This can be particularly problematic in complex cases where the exact positioning and interaction of tissues and organs are critical.
CT scans represent an improvement over X-rays by providing cross-sectional images of the body, allowing for a more detailed view. Nevertheless, CT scans still rely on a series of 2D images that must be mentally reconstructed into a 3D model by the clinician. This process is not only time-consuming but also prone to human error, as the clinician's interpretation can vary based on experience and skill level.
Another traditional method involves the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which offers excellent soft tissue contrast. However, MRI scans also produce 2D images that require significant interpretation. Additionally, MRI machines are expensive, and the scans can be time-consuming, making them less accessible for routine use in some settings.
The limitations of these traditional methods have become increasingly apparent as medical treatments have grown more complex. For instance, in radiation therapy for cancer, precise targeting of tumors is crucial to maximize efficacy while minimizing damage to surrounding healthy tissues. Traditional 2D imaging often lacks the necessary detail and spatial accuracy to achieve this precision.
Furthermore, traditional methods may not adequately capture the dynamic nature of certain conditions. For example, the heart's constant movement makes it challenging to obtain clear images using static 2D methods, potentially leading to inaccuracies in diagnosis and treatment planning.
In summary, while traditional treatment planning methods have served the medical community well, their limitations in providing detailed, accurate, and comprehensive views of the body's internal structures have driven the need for more advanced techniques. The advent of 3D imaging represents a significant leap forward, offering the potential to overcome many of these limitations and enhance the precision and effectiveness of medical treatments.
In the evolving world of orthodontics, the incorporation of 3D imaging has revolutionized treatment planning and diagnostic precision.
Traditionally, orthodontists have relied on 2D radiographs and physical models to assess a patient's dental and skeletal structures. While these methods provided valuable insights, they often fell short in capturing the complete picture, leading to potential inaccuracies in diagnosis and treatment planning.
Enter 3D imaging. This advanced technology offers a comprehensive and detailed view of the patient's oral and maxillofacial structures. By capturing images from multiple angles and depths, 3D scans create a holistic representation of the patient's anatomy.
One of the primary benefits of 3D imaging in orthodontics is the enhanced diagnostic accuracy it offers. With a 3D model, orthodontists can identify even the most subtle abnormalities in tooth alignment, jaw position, and bone structure. This level of detail ensures that no potential issue goes unnoticed, allowing for a more thorough and precise diagnosis.
Moreover, 3D imaging facilitates better communication between orthodontists and patients. Visualizing the treatment plan in three dimensions helps patients understand their condition and the proposed interventions more clearly. This transparency fosters trust and ensures that patients are well-informed about their treatment journey.
In treatment planning, 3D imaging allows orthodontists to simulate various treatment scenarios. They can predict the outcomes of different interventions, such as braces or clear aligners, and choose the most effective approach for each patient. This proactive planning minimizes the risk of complications and ensures optimal results.
Furthermore, 3D imaging integrates seamlessly with other digital tools, such as computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM). This synergy enables the creation of custom orthodontic appliances that are precisely tailored to the patient's unique anatomy, enhancing both comfort and effectiveness.
In conclusion, the adoption of 3D imaging in orthodontics marks a significant leap forward in diagnostic accuracy and treatment planning. By providing a detailed and comprehensive view of the patient's oral structures, this technology ensures that orthodontists can deliver more precise, effective, and patient-centered care. As the field continues to embrace digital innovations, the future of orthodontics looks brighter and more accurate than ever.
Exploring 3D Imaging in Treatment Planning: Benefits of Using 3D Imaging for Personalized Treatment Plans in Children
The integration of 3D imaging technology into medical treatment planning represents a significant advancement in personalized healthcare, particularly for children. This innovative approach offers numerous benefits that can enhance the effectiveness, precision, and overall experience of medical interventions. Here, we delve into the advantages of utilizing 3D imaging for crafting tailored treatment plans for young patients.
First and foremost, 3D imaging provides an unparalleled level of detail and accuracy in visualizing a child's anatomy. Unlike traditional 2D imaging techniques, 3D scans offer a comprehensive view of the body's structures, allowing healthcare professionals to identify even the subtlest anomalies or conditions. This detailed visualization is crucial for diagnosing complex issues and formulating precise treatment strategies.
Moreover, the ability to create personalized 3D models of a child's anatomy enables medical teams to simulate various treatment options before any actual procedures are performed. This pre-surgical planning can significantly reduce the risks associated with invasive treatments, as doctors can anticipate potential challenges and devise the most effective approach. For children, whose bodies are still growing and developing, this level of precision is invaluable in ensuring that treatments are both safe and effective.
Another significant benefit of 3D imaging in pediatric treatment planning is the enhanced communication it facilitates between healthcare providers and patients' families. By presenting a tangible, visual representation of a child's condition and the proposed treatment plan, medical professionals can more effectively explain complex medical concepts to parents and guardians. This clarity can alleviate anxiety and foster a more collaborative environment, where families feel empowered to participate in their child's healthcare decisions.
Additionally, 3D imaging can lead to more efficient use of medical resources. By accurately planning treatments in advance, healthcare providers can minimize the need for repeated procedures or adjustments, thereby reducing the overall time a child spends in medical care. This efficiency not only benefits the child by reducing stress and discomfort but also helps manage healthcare costs more effectively.
In conclusion, the incorporation of 3D imaging into treatment planning for children offers a multitude of benefits that enhance the quality of care. From providing detailed anatomical insights and enabling precise treatment simulations to improving communication with families and optimizing resource use, 3D imaging stands as a pivotal tool in the pursuit of personalized, effective pediatric healthcare. As technology continues to evolve, the potential for 3D imaging to transform treatment planning and outcomes for children grows ever more promising.
In the evolving field of pediatric orthodontics, the integration of 3D imaging technology has marked a significant advancement in treatment planning and patient outcomes. This essay delves into case studies that exemplify the successful application of 3D imaging in pediatric orthodontics, highlighting its transformative impact on diagnosis, treatment planning, and patient satisfaction.
One notable case involves a young patient with a complex malocclusion, where traditional 2D imaging fell short in providing a comprehensive understanding of the dental and skeletal structures. The introduction of 3D imaging allowed orthodontists to obtain a detailed view of the patient's dental anatomy, facilitating a more accurate diagnosis and personalized treatment plan. This precise imaging enabled the orthodontist to predict the movement of teeth more accurately, leading to a more efficient treatment process and a successful outcome.
Another compelling case study focuses on a child with a congenital craniofacial anomaly. The use of 3D imaging not only aided in the initial assessment but also played a crucial role in monitoring the progression of the condition and the effectiveness of the orthodontic intervention over time. This continuous feedback loop ensured that the treatment remained aligned with the patient's evolving needs, demonstrating the dynamic capabilities of 3D imaging in pediatric orthodontics.
Furthermore, a case involving early intervention for a child at risk of developing severe orthodontic issues illustrates the preventive potential of 3D imaging. By identifying subtle anomalies in the early stages, orthodontists were able to implement timely interventions, potentially avoiding more invasive treatments in the future. This proactive approach underscores the value of 3D imaging in not only treating existing conditions but also in preventing future complications.
In conclusion, these case studies underscore the invaluable role of 3D imaging in pediatric orthodontics. By offering unparalleled insights into the complexities of dental and skeletal structures, 3D imaging enhances the accuracy of diagnoses, the efficacy of treatment plans, and ultimately, patient outcomes. As technology continues to advance, the integration of 3D imaging in pediatric orthodontics promises to further revolutionize the field, offering new possibilities for innovation and excellence in patient care.
When examining the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of 3D imaging technology in treatment planning, it is essential to consider both the financial implications and the ease of use for medical professionals and patients alike.
Firstly, the cost-effectiveness of 3D imaging technology can be assessed in terms of the long-term benefits it offers. While the initial investment in 3D imaging equipment may be substantial, the technology provides detailed and precise images that enhance diagnostic accuracy. This can lead to more effective treatment plans, potentially reducing the need for additional tests and revisions. Moreover, the enhanced visualization aids in better communication between healthcare providers and patients, leading to improved patient outcomes and satisfaction. Over time, these factors can contribute to cost savings by minimizing complications and the need for repeat procedures.
Accessibility is another crucial aspect to consider. Traditionally, advanced imaging technologies were limited to large hospitals and specialized clinics. However, advancements in technology have led to more compact and user-friendly 3D imaging devices. These innovations have made it possible for smaller practices and rural healthcare facilities to incorporate 3D imaging into their treatment planning processes. Additionally, the integration of 3D imaging with electronic health records (EHR) systems has streamlined the workflow, making it easier for healthcare providers to access and utilize this technology efficiently.
Patient accessibility is also enhanced as 3D imaging can be performed more quickly and comfortably compared to traditional imaging methods. This not only improves the patient experience but also increases the likelihood of patient compliance with recommended treatments.
In conclusion, while the upfront costs of 3D imaging technology may seem daunting, the long-term benefits in terms of cost-effectiveness and improved patient care make it a valuable investment. Furthermore, the increasing accessibility of this technology ensures that more patients can benefit from its precision and accuracy, ultimately leading to better healthcare outcomes.
Future trends and advancements in 3D imaging for orthodontic treatment planning are poised to revolutionize the field by enhancing accuracy, efficiency, and patient outcomes. As technology continues to evolve, several key developments are expected to shape the landscape of orthodontic care.
One significant trend is the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning algorithms into 3D imaging systems. These advanced technologies have the potential to automate and optimize various aspects of treatment planning, such as diagnosis, treatment duration prediction, and even customized bracket placement. By analyzing vast amounts of data, AI can provide orthodontists with valuable insights and recommendations, ultimately leading to more personalized and effective treatment plans.
Another exciting advancement is the continued improvement of imaging resolution and speed. Higher resolution scans enable orthodontists to visualize even the smallest anatomical details with greater clarity, allowing for more precise diagnosis and treatment planning. Faster scanning times not only enhance patient comfort but also streamline the overall workflow, reducing chair time and increasing efficiency in clinical practice.
Moreover, the integration of 3D imaging with other digital technologies, such as computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM), is expected to further revolutionize orthodontic treatment planning. This seamless integration enables orthodontists to design and fabricate customized appliances, such as aligners and retainers, with enhanced precision and efficiency. Patients can benefit from improved comfort, aesthetics, and treatment outcomes as a result.
Additionally, the emergence of augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies holds promise for immersive treatment planning and patient education. Orthodontists can use AR and VR tools to visualize treatment progress in real-time, simulate different treatment scenarios, and communicate complex concepts to patients in an engaging and interactive manner. This not only enhances patient understanding and satisfaction but also facilitates better collaboration between orthodontists and patients in the decision-making process.
In conclusion, future trends and advancements in 3D imaging for orthodontic treatment planning are set to revolutionize the way orthodontists diagnose, plan, and deliver care to their patients. By harnessing the power of AI, improved imaging technology, digital integration, and immersive technologies, orthodontists can achieve unprecedented levels of precision, efficiency, and patient-centered care in the field of orthodontics.
Malocclusion | |
---|---|
![]() |
|
Malocclusion in 10-year-old girl | |
Specialty | Dentistry ![]() |
In orthodontics, a malocclusion is a misalignment or incorrect relation between the teeth of the upper and lower dental arches when they approach each other as the jaws close. The English-language term dates from 1864;[1] Edward Angle (1855–1930), the "father of modern orthodontics",[2][3][need quotation to verify] popularised it. The word derives from mal- 'incorrect' and occlusion 'the manner in which opposing teeth meet'.
The malocclusion classification is based on the relationship of the mesiobuccal cusp of the maxillary first molar and the buccal groove of the mandibular first molar. If this molar relationship exists, then the teeth can align into normal occlusion. According to Angle, malocclusion is any deviation of the occlusion from the ideal.[4] However, assessment for malocclusion should also take into account aesthetics and the impact on functionality. If these aspects are acceptable to the patient despite meeting the formal definition of malocclusion, then treatment may not be necessary. It is estimated that nearly 30% of the population have malocclusions that are categorised as severe and definitely benefit from orthodontic treatment.[5]
The aetiology of malocclusion is somewhat contentious, however, simply put it is multifactorial, with influences being both genetic[6][unreliable source?] and environmental.[7] Malocclusion is already present in one of the Skhul and Qafzeh hominin fossils and other prehistoric human skulls.[8][9] There are three generally accepted causative factors of malocclusion:
There is not one single cause of malocclusion, and when planning orthodontic treatment it is often helpful to consider the above factors and the impact they have played on malocclusion. These can also be influenced by oral habits and pressure resulting in malocclusion.[11][12]
In the active skeletal growth,[13] mouthbreathing, finger sucking, thumb sucking, pacifier sucking, onychophagia (nail biting), dermatophagia, pen biting, pencil biting, abnormal posture, deglutition disorders and other habits greatly influence the development of the face and dental arches.[14][15][16][17][18] Pacifier sucking habits are also correlated with otitis media.[19][20] Dental caries, periapical inflammation and tooth loss in the deciduous teeth can alter the correct permanent teeth eruptions.
Malocclusion can occur in primary and secondary dentition.
In primary dentition malocclusion is caused by:
In secondary dentition malocclusion is caused by:
Malocclusion is a common finding,[22][23] although it is not usually serious enough to require treatment. Those who have more severe malocclusions, which present as a part of craniofacial anomalies, may require orthodontic and sometimes surgical treatment (orthognathic surgery) to correct the problem.
The ultimate goal of orthodontic treatment is to achieve a stable, functional and aesthetic alignment of teeth which serves to better the patient's dental and total health.[24] The symptoms which arise as a result of malocclusion derive from a deficiency in one or more of these categories.[25]
The symptoms are as follows:
Malocclusions may be coupled with skeletal disharmony of the face, where the relations between the upper and lower jaws are not appropriate. Such skeletal disharmonies often distort sufferer's face shape, severely affect aesthetics of the face, and may be coupled with mastication or speech problems. Most skeletal malocclusions can only be treated by orthognathic surgery.[citation needed]
Depending on the sagittal relations of teeth and jaws, malocclusions can be divided mainly into three types according to Angle's classification system published 1899. However, there are also other conditions, e.g. crowding of teeth, not directly fitting into this classification.
Many authors have tried to modify or replace Angle's classification. This has resulted in many subtypes and new systems (see section below: Review of Angle's system of classes).
A deep bite (also known as a Type II Malocclusion) is a condition in which the upper teeth overlap the lower teeth, which can result in hard and soft tissue trauma, in addition to an effect on appearance.[26] It has been found to occur in 15–20% of the US population.[27]
An open bite is a condition characterised by a complete lack of overlap and occlusion between the upper and lower incisors.[28] In children, open bite can be caused by prolonged thumb sucking.[29] Patients often present with impaired speech and mastication.[30]
This is a vertical measurement of the degree of overlap between the maxillary incisors and the mandibular incisors. There are three features that are analysed in the classification of an overbite:
An average overbite is when the upper anterior teeth cover a third of the lower teeth. Covering less than this is described as ‘reduced’ and more than this is an ‘increased’ overbite. No overlap or contact is considered an ‘anterior open bite’.[25][31][32]
![]() |
This section may be too technical for most readers to understand.(September 2023)
|
Edward Angle, who is considered the father of modern orthodontics, was the first to classify malocclusion. He based his classifications on the relative position of the maxillary first molar.[33] According to Angle, the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first molar should align with the buccal groove of the mandibular first molar. The teeth should all fit on a line of occlusion which, in the upper arch, is a smooth curve through the central fossae of the posterior teeth and cingulum of the canines and incisors, and in the lower arch, is a smooth curve through the buccal cusps of the posterior teeth and incisal edges of the anterior teeth. Any variations from this resulted in malocclusion types. It is also possible to have different classes of malocclusion on left and right sides.
A major disadvantage of Angle's system of classifying malocclusions is that it only considers two dimensions along a spatial axis in the sagittal plane in the terminal occlusion, but occlusion problems can be three-dimensional. It does not recognise deviations in other spatial axes, asymmetric deviations, functional faults and other therapy-related features.
Angle's classification system also lacks a theoretical basis; it is purely descriptive. Its much-discussed weaknesses include that it only considers static occlusion, it does not account for the development and causes (aetiology) of occlusion problems, and it disregards the proportions (or relationships in general) of teeth and face.[34] Thus, many attempts have been made to modify the Angle system or to replace it completely with a more efficient one,[35] but Angle's classification continues be popular mainly because of its simplicity and clarity.[citation needed]
Well-known modifications to Angle's classification date back to Martin Dewey (1915) and Benno Lischer (1912, 1933). Alternative systems have been suggested by, among others, Simon (1930, the first three-dimensional classification system), Jacob A. Salzmann (1950, with a classification system based on skeletal structures) and James L. Ackerman and William R. Proffit (1969).[36]
Besides the molar relationship, the British Standards Institute Classification also classifies malocclusion into incisor relationship and canine relationship.
Dental crowding is defined by the amount of space that would be required for the teeth to be in correct alignment. It is obtained in two ways: 1) by measuring the amount of space required and reducing this from calculating the space available via the width of the teeth, or 2) by measuring the degree of overlap of the teeth.
The following criterion is used:[25]
Genetic (inheritance) factors, extra teeth, lost teeth, impacted teeth, or abnormally shaped teeth have been cited as causes of crowding. Ill-fitting dental fillings, crowns, appliances, retainers, or braces as well as misalignment of jaw fractures after a severe injury are also known to cause crowding.[26] Tumors of the mouth and jaw, thumb sucking, tongue thrusting, pacifier use beyond age three, and prolonged use of a bottle have also been identified.[26]
Lack of masticatory stress during development can cause tooth overcrowding.[37][38] Children who chewed a hard resinous gum for two hours a day showed increased facial growth.[37] Experiments in animals have shown similar results. In an experiment on two groups of rock hyraxes fed hardened or softened versions of the same foods, the animals fed softer food had significantly narrower and shorter faces and thinner and shorter mandibles than animals fed hard food.[37][39][failed verification]
A 2016 review found that breastfeeding lowers the incidence of malocclusions developing later on in developing infants.[40]
During the transition to agriculture, the shape of the human mandible went through a series of changes. The mandible underwent a complex shape changes not matched by the teeth, leading to incongruity between the dental and mandibular form. These changes in human skulls may have been "driven by the decreasing bite forces required to chew the processed foods eaten once humans switched to growing different types of cereals, milking and herding animals about 10,000 years ago."[38][41]
Orthodontic management of the condition includes dental braces, lingual braces, clear aligners or palatal expanders.[42] Other treatments include the removal of one or more teeth and the repair of injured teeth. In some cases, surgery may be necessary.[43]
Malocclusion is often treated with orthodontics,[42] such as tooth extraction, clear aligners, or dental braces,[44] followed by growth modification in children or jaw surgery (orthognathic surgery) in adults. Surgical intervention is used only in rare occasions. This may include surgical reshaping to lengthen or shorten the jaw. Wires, plates, or screws may be used to secure the jaw bone, in a manner like the surgical stabilization of jaw fractures. Very few people have "perfect" alignment of their teeth with most problems being minor that do not require treatment.[37]
Crowding of the teeth is treated with orthodontics, often with tooth extraction, clear aligners, or dental braces, followed by growth modification in children or jaw surgery (orthognathic surgery) in adults. Surgery may be required on rare occasions. This may include surgical reshaping to lengthen or shorten the jaw (orthognathic surgery). Wires, plates, or screws may be used to secure the jaw bone, in a manner similar to the surgical stabilization of jaw fractures. Very few people have "perfect" alignment of their teeth. However, most problems are very minor and do not require treatment.[39]
While treatment is not crucial in class I malocclusions, in severe cases of crowding can be an indication for intervention. Studies indicate that tooth extraction can have benefits to correcting malocclusion in individuals.[45][46] Further research is needed as reoccurring crowding has been examined in other clinical trials.[45][47]
A few treatment options for class II malocclusions include:
Low- to moderate- quality evidence suggests that providing early orthodontic treatment for children with prominent upper front teeth (class II division 1) is more effective for reducing the incidence of incisal trauma than providing one course of orthodontic treatment in adolescence.[50] There do not appear to be any other advantages of providing early treatment when compared to late treatment.[50] Low-quality evidence suggests that, compared to no treatment, late treatment in adolescence with functional appliances is effective for reducing the prominence of upper front teeth.[50]
Treatment can be undertaken using orthodontic treatments using dental braces.[51] While treatment is carried out, there is no evidence from clinical trials to recommend or discourage any type of orthodontic treatment in children.[51] A 2018 Cochrane systematic review anticipated that the evidence base supporting treatment approaches is not likely to improve occlusion due to the low prevalence of the condition and the ethical difficulties in recruiting people to participate in a randomized controlled trials for treating this condition.[51]
The British Standard Institute (BSI) classify class III incisor relationship as the lower incisor edge lies anterior to the cingulum plateau of the upper incisors, with reduced or reversed over jet.[52] The skeletal facial deformity is characterized by mandibular prognathism, maxillary retrognathism or a combination of the two. This effects 3-8% of UK population with a higher incidence seen in Asia.[53]
One of the main reasons for correcting Class III malocclusion is aesthetics and function. This can have a psychological impact on the person with malocclusion resulting in speech and mastication problems as well. In mild class III cases, the patient is quite accepting of the aesthetics and the situation is monitored to observe the progression of skeletal growth.[54]
Maxillary and mandibular skeletal changes during prepubertal, pubertal and post pubertal stages show that class III malocclusion is established before the prepubertal stage.[55] One treatment option is the use of growth modification appliances such as the Chin Cap which has greatly improved the skeletal framework in the initial stages. However, majority of cases are shown to relapse into inherited class III malocclusion during the pubertal growth stage and when the appliance is removed after treatment.[55]
Another approach is to carry out orthognathic surgery, such as a bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) which is indicated by horizontal mandibular excess. This involves surgically cutting through the mandible and moving the fragment forward or backwards for desired function and is supplemented with pre and post surgical orthodontics to ensure correct tooth relationship. Although the most common surgery of the mandible, it comes with several complications including: bleeding from inferior alveolar artery, unfavorable splits, condylar resorption, avascular necrosis and worsening of temporomandibular joint.[56]
Orthodontic camouflage can also be used in patients with mild skeletal discrepancies. This is a less invasive approach that uses orthodontic brackets to correct malocclusion and try to hide the skeletal discrepancy. Due to limitations of orthodontics, this option is more viable for patients who are not as concerned about the aesthetics of their facial appearance and are happy to address the malocclusion only, as well as avoiding the risks which come with orthognathic surgery. Cephalometric data can aid in the differentiation between the cases that benefit from ortho-surgical or orthodontic treatment only (camouflage); for instance, examining a large group of orthognathic patient with Class III malocclusions they had average ANB angle of -3.57° (95% CI, -3.92° to -3.21°). [57]
The most common corrective treatments available are fixed or removal appliances (such as dental braces), which may or may not require surgical intervention. At this time there is no robust evidence that treatment will be successful.[51]
An open bite malocclusion is when the upper teeth don't overlap the lower teeth. When this malocclusion occurs at the front teeth it is known as anterior open bite. An open bite is difficult to treat due to multifactorial causes, with relapse being a major concern. This is particularly so for an anterior open bite.[58] Therefore, it is important to carry out a thorough initial assessment in order to obtain a diagnosis to tailor a suitable treatment plan.[58] It is important to take into consideration any habitual risk factors, as this is crucial for a successful outcome without relapse. Treatment approach includes behavior changes, appliances and surgery. Treatment for adults include a combination of extractions, fixed appliances, intermaxillary elastics and orthognathic surgery.[30] For children, orthodontics is usually used to compensate for continued growth. With children with mixed dentition, the malocclusion may resolve on its own as the permanent teeth erupt. Furthermore, should the malocclusion be caused by childhood habits such as digit, thumb or pacifier sucking, it may result in resolution as the habit is stopped. Habit deterrent appliances may be used to help in breaking digit and thumb sucking habits. Other treatment options for patients who are still growing include functional appliances and headgear appliances.
Identifying the presence of tooth size discrepancies between the maxillary and mandibular arches is an important component of correct orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning.
To establish appropriate alignment and occlusion, the size of upper and lower front teeth, or upper and lower teeth in general, needs to be proportional. Inter-arch tooth size discrepancy (ITSD) is defined as a disproportion in the mesio-distal dimensions of teeth of opposing dental arches. The prevalence is clinically significant among orthodontic patients and has been reported to range from 17% to 30%.[59]
Identifying inter-arch tooth size discrepancy (ITSD) before treatment begins allows the practitioner to develop the treatment plan in a way that will take ITSD into account. ITSD corrective treatment may entail demanding reduction (interproximal wear), increase (crowns and resins), or elimination (extractions) of dental mass prior to treatment finalization.[60]
Several methods have been used to determine ITSD. Of these methods the one most commonly used is the Bolton analysis. Bolton developed a method to calculate the ratio between the mesiodistal width of maxillary and mandibular teeth and stated that a correct and harmonious occlusion is possible only with adequate proportionality of tooth sizes.[60] Bolton's formula concludes that if in the anterior portion the ratio is less than 77.2% the lower teeth are too narrow, the upper teeth are too wide or there is a combination of both. If the ratio is higher than 77.2% either the lower teeth are too wide, the upper teeth are too narrow or there is a combination of both.[59]
Other kinds of malocclusions can be due to or horizontal, vertical, or transverse skeletal discrepancies, including skeletal asymmetries.
Increased vertical growth causes a long facial profile and commonly leads to an open bite malocclusion, while decreased vertical facial growth causes a short facial profile and is commonly associated with a deep bite malocclusion. However, there are many other more common causes for open bites (such as tongue thrusting and thumb sucking) and likewise for deep bites.[61][62][63]
The upper or lower jaw can be overgrown (macrognathia) or undergrown (micrognathia).[62][61][63] It has been reported that patients with micrognathia are also affected by retrognathia (abnormal posterior positioning of the mandible or maxilla relative to the facial structure).[62] These patients are majorly predisposed to a class II malocclusion. Mandibular macrognathia results in prognathism and predisposes patients to a class III malocclusion.[64]
Most malocclusion studies to date have focused on Class III malocclusions. Genetic studies for Class II and Class I malocclusion are more rare. An example of hereditary mandibular prognathism can be seen amongst the Hapsburg Royal family where one third of the affected individuals with severe class III malocclusion had one parent with a similar phenotype [65]
The frequent presentation of dental malocclusions in patients with craniofacial birth defects also supports a strong genetic aetiology. About 150 genes are associated with craniofacial conditions presenting with malocclusions.[66] Micrognathia is a commonly recurring craniofacial birth defect appearing among multiple syndromes.
For patients with severe malocclusions, corrective jaw surgery or orthognathic surgery may be carried out as a part of overall treatment, which can be seen in about 5% of the general population.[62][61][63]
cite book
: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) CS1 maint: others (link)
Part of a series on Patients |
Patients |
---|
Concepts |
|
Consent |
|
Rights |
|
Approaches |
|
Abuse |
|
Medical sociology |
|
A patient is any recipient of health care services that are performed by healthcare professionals. The patient is most often ill or injured and in need of treatment by a physician, nurse, optometrist, dentist, veterinarian, or other health care provider.
The word patient originally meant 'one who suffers'. This English noun comes from the Latin word patiens, the present participle of the deponent verb, patior, meaning 'I am suffering', and akin to the Greek verb πάσχειν (paskhein 'to suffer') and its cognate noun πάθος (pathos).
This language has been construed as meaning that the role of patients is to passively accept and tolerate the suffering and treatments prescribed by the healthcare providers, without engaging in shared decision-making about their care.[1]
An outpatient (or out-patient) is a patient who attends an outpatient clinic with no plan to stay beyond the duration of the visit. Even if the patient will not be formally admitted with a note as an outpatient, their attendance is still registered, and the provider will usually give a note explaining the reason for the visit, tests, or procedure/surgery, which should include the names and titles of the participating personnel, the patient's name and date of birth, signature of informed consent, estimated pre-and post-service time for history and exam (before and after), any anesthesia, medications or future treatment plans needed, and estimated time of discharge absent any (further) complications. Treatment provided in this fashion is called ambulatory care. Sometimes surgery is performed without the need for a formal hospital admission or an overnight stay, and this is called outpatient surgery or day surgery, which has many benefits including lowered healthcare cost, reducing the amount of medication prescribed, and using the physician's or surgeon's time more efficiently. Outpatient surgery is suited best for more healthy patients undergoing minor or intermediate procedures (limited urinary-tract, eye, or ear, nose, and throat procedures and procedures involving superficial skin and the extremities). More procedures are being performed in a surgeon's office, termed office-based surgery, rather than in a hospital-based operating room.
An inpatient (or in-patient), on the other hand, is "admitted" to stay in a hospital overnight or for an indeterminate time, usually, several days or weeks, though in some extreme cases, such as with coma or persistent vegetative state, patients can stay in hospitals for years, sometimes until death. Treatment provided in this fashion is called inpatient care. The admission to the hospital involves the production of an admission note. The leaving of the hospital is officially termed discharge, and involves a corresponding discharge note, and sometimes an assessment process to consider ongoing needs. In the English National Health Service this may take the form of "Discharge to Assess" - where the assessment takes place after the patient has gone home.[2]
Misdiagnosis is the leading cause of medical error in outpatient facilities. When the U.S. Institute of Medicine's groundbreaking 1999 report, To Err Is Human, found up to 98,000 hospital patients die from preventable medical errors in the U.S. each year,[3] early efforts focused on inpatient safety.[4] While patient safety efforts have focused on inpatient hospital settings for more than a decade, medical errors are even more likely to happen in a doctor's office or outpatient clinic or center.[citation needed]
A day patient (or day-patient) is a patient who is using the full range of services of a hospital or clinic but is not expected to stay the night. The term was originally used by psychiatric hospital services using of this patient type to care for people needing support to make the transition from in-patient to out-patient care. However, the term is now also heavily used for people attending hospitals for day surgery.
Because of concerns such as dignity, human rights and political correctness, the term "patient" is not always used to refer to a person receiving health care. Other terms that are sometimes used include health consumer, healthcare consumer, customer or client. However, such terminology may be offensive to those receiving public health care, as it implies a business relationship.
In veterinary medicine, the client is the owner or guardian of the patient. These may be used by governmental agencies, insurance companies, patient groups, or health care facilities. Individuals who use or have used psychiatric services may alternatively refer to themselves as consumers, users, or survivors.
In nursing homes and assisted living facilities, the term resident is generally used in lieu of patient.[5] Similarly, those receiving home health care are called clients.
The doctor–patient relationship has sometimes been characterized as silencing the voice of patients.[6] It is now widely agreed that putting patients at the centre of healthcare[7] by trying to provide a consistent, informative and respectful service to patients will improve both outcomes and patient satisfaction.[8]
When patients are not at the centre of healthcare, when institutional procedures and targets eclipse local concerns, then patient neglect is possible.[9] Incidents, such as the Stafford Hospital scandal, Winterbourne View hospital abuse scandal and the Veterans Health Administration controversy of 2014 have shown the dangers of prioritizing cost control over the patient experience.[10] Investigations into these and other scandals have recommended that healthcare systems put patient experience at the center, and especially that patients themselves are heard loud and clear within health services.[11]
There are many reasons for why health services should listen more to patients. Patients spend more time in healthcare services than regulators or quality controllers, and can recognize problems such as service delays, poor hygiene, and poor conduct.[12] Patients are particularly good at identifying soft problems, such as attitudes, communication, and 'caring neglect',[9] that are difficult to capture with institutional monitoring.[13]
One important way in which patients can be placed at the centre of healthcare is for health services to be more open about patient complaints.[14] Each year many hundreds of thousands of patients complain about the care they have received, and these complaints contain valuable information for any health services which want to learn about and improve patient experience.[15]