A Study of the Quality of Finish of Lingual versus Labial Bracket Systems As Measured
By the Objective Grading System: A Retrospective Study in a University Orthodontic
Clinic
{"title":"A Study of the Quality of Finish of Lingual versus Labial Bracket Systems As Measured\nBy the Objective Grading System: A Retrospective Study in a University Orthodontic\nClinic","authors":"","doi":"10.33140/jodh.03.02.11","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The purposes of this study were to determine the quality of final orthodontic treatment outcome and average treatment\ntime with fixed lingual brackets compared to labial brackets. Our hypothesis was that labial fixed appliances produce a higher quality\nof final treatment outcome, and a shorter average treatment time compared to lingual fixed appliances.\nMaterials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of matched pairs. Records of twenty subjects treated with lingual appliances\nwere included. These were paired with twenty patient records of subjects in fixed labial appliances with matching initial discrepancy\nindex (DI) (±5 points), Angle classification (within one-half step), number of extracted teeth, and age. Final models were scored\nusing the eight criteria of the American Board of Orthodontics’ Objective Grading System (OGS) and treatment time was recorded\nin number of days.\nResults: The mean difference in OGS scores between groups was 2.00 ± 8.89 points with a mean OGS score of the labial and lingual\nfixed appliance groups of 21.6 ± 7.45 and 19.6 ± 6.43, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.33). Lingual\nsubjects’ treatment time was an average of 4.25 ± 213.78 days less compared to their matched labial subjects. This difference was\nnot significant (p = 0.93). A statistically significant difference was found in the buccolingual inclination subcategory of the OGS. The\nmean difference in the buccolingual inclination score of lingual subjects was 1.90 ± 3.52 points higher than labial subjects (p = 0.03).\nConclusion: Lingual fixed appliance subjects had no significant difference in treatment time and / or treatment outcome as measured\nby OGS when paired with labial fixed appliance subjects, however, they did have significantly higher buccolingual inclination\ndiscrepancies.","PeriodicalId":15598,"journal":{"name":"Journal of dental health, oral disorders & therapy","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of dental health, oral disorders & therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/jodh.03.02.11","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The purposes of this study were to determine the quality of final orthodontic treatment outcome and average treatment
time with fixed lingual brackets compared to labial brackets. Our hypothesis was that labial fixed appliances produce a higher quality
of final treatment outcome, and a shorter average treatment time compared to lingual fixed appliances.
Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of matched pairs. Records of twenty subjects treated with lingual appliances
were included. These were paired with twenty patient records of subjects in fixed labial appliances with matching initial discrepancy
index (DI) (±5 points), Angle classification (within one-half step), number of extracted teeth, and age. Final models were scored
using the eight criteria of the American Board of Orthodontics’ Objective Grading System (OGS) and treatment time was recorded
in number of days.
Results: The mean difference in OGS scores between groups was 2.00 ± 8.89 points with a mean OGS score of the labial and lingual
fixed appliance groups of 21.6 ± 7.45 and 19.6 ± 6.43, respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.33). Lingual
subjects’ treatment time was an average of 4.25 ± 213.78 days less compared to their matched labial subjects. This difference was
not significant (p = 0.93). A statistically significant difference was found in the buccolingual inclination subcategory of the OGS. The
mean difference in the buccolingual inclination score of lingual subjects was 1.90 ± 3.52 points higher than labial subjects (p = 0.03).
Conclusion: Lingual fixed appliance subjects had no significant difference in treatment time and / or treatment outcome as measured
by OGS when paired with labial fixed appliance subjects, however, they did have significantly higher buccolingual inclination
discrepancies.