ObjectivePatients' and parents' expectations are important in orthodontic treatment decision making. The literature generally demonstrates the perceived benefits of orthodontic treatment, but patients' and their parents' concerns about orthodontic treatment have not been investigated comprehensively. The aim of this study was to identify patients' and parents' concerns about orthodontic treatment and compare them according to sex, age, and treatment demand level.MethodsOne hundred and eighty-nine children and their parents were interviewed about concerns related to orthodontic treatment. Patients and parents were asked about orthodontic treatment decisions. Answers were recorded as "yes," "no," or "don't know." Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare concerns between age groups, sexes, and treatment demand levels. Kappa statistics were used to assess agreement between patients and their parents.ResultsConcerns about orthodontic treatment were gathered under 10 items as follows: "feeling pain," "the appearance of braces," "being teased," "avoiding smiling," "speech problems," "dietary changes," "problems with transportation," "economic problems," "long treatment duration," and "missing school." There was no statistically significant difference in concerns between the sexes or age groups. Some concern items and treatment demand were inversely related in patients.ConclusionsThe results of this study demonstrate patients' and parents' concerns about orthodontic treatment. Differences between the concerns of patients with different treatment demands imply that children might reject orthodontic treatment because of their concerns. Appropriate consultation of patients addressing their concerns may help reduce anxiety and improve the acceptance of treatment.

The relationship between orthodontic treatment need and quality of life is moderated by personality traits. Early adolescents with higher extraversion and openness to experience are less affected by increased orthodontic treatment need.

PurposeThe Child Perceptions Questionnaire 11–14 (CPQ 11–14) is a generic tool that was developed to measure oral health-related quality of life in early adolescents. The aim of this study was to prepare a Turkish version of the CPQ 11–14 and to test its psychometric properties in an adolescent orthodontic patient sample.Materials and MethodsThe questionnaire was adapted to Turkish using a forward backward translation method, and it was found to be understandable in a pilot study (n=15). The Turkish version of the CPQ 11–14 was administered to 200 orthodontic consultation patients (aged 11–14 years). Retests were conducted in 50 patients 2 weeks after the first tests. The ICON index was used to determine the orthodontic treatment need. Decayed, missing, and filled teeth were also recorded with the DMFT index. Spearman correlations and t-tests were used to assess validity. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to assess test–retest reliability.ResultsSignificant positive correlations were found between CPQ 11–14 scores and the global ratings of oral health (r=0.381), global ratings of well-being (r=0.350), ICON scores (r=0.211), and DMFT scores (r=0.233), supporting construct validity. Children who needed orthodontic treatment had a worse quality of life than those who did not need orthodontic treatment (p=0.016). Cronbach’s alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated as 0.917 and 0.817, respectively, demonstrating good internal consistency and acceptable test–retest reliability.ConclusionThe Turkish version of the CPQ 11–14 was found to be valid and reliable in 11–14-year-old orthodontic patients.

Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate the effects of ozone and prophylactic antimicrobial applications on the shear bond strengths and bond failure interfaces of orthodontic brackets.

Introduction:Cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) methods have gained popularity to assess growth and development status for orthodontic patients. Although craniofacial and craniocervical structures are known to be associated, there is no evidence in the literature if this relation might negatively affect the accuracy of CVM assessments. Therefore, this study aimed to comparatively investigate the sizes of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cervical vertebrae in adult females (radius union stage of skeletal maturity) who have different sagittal skeletal patterns.Materials and Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted, and 151 lateral cephalometric radiographs of adult female patients were assessed in the study. Patients were assigned to three groups according to ANB angle. Parameters including concavity depth at the lower border of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cervical vertebrae and base length, upper border length, body length, posterior height, anterior height, and body height of the 3rd and 4th cervical vertebrae bodies were measured. One-way analysis of variance was used for between-group comparisons.Results:No statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of concavity depth at the lower borders of the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th cervical vertebrae (P > 0.05). Base length, upper border length, body length, posterior height, anterior height, and body height of the 3rd and 4th cervical vertebrae were also similar between groups (P > 0.05).Conclusions:The results of this study supports that sagittal craniofacial pattern has no effect on the accuracy of using the methods assessing CVM and calculating cervical vertebral age.