Objectives To assess the correlation between malocclusion and a history of bullying. Materials and Methods A cross-sectional study of 494 adolescents aged 12 to 15 years was conducted. The National School Health Survey questionnaire (PeNSE 1 and 2) was used to determine history of bullying by identifying the victim and the abuser. Variables were evaluated based on the individual (age), environment (income, father's and mother's education, housing, government assistance, and parents' occupation), social and emotional well-being (CPQ11–14 domains), self-perceived need for orthodontic treatment, and clinical conditions (crowding, diastema, maxillary and mandibular overjet, and anterior open bite). Data were analyzed by Spearman correlation and by multivariate analysis, which allowed graphical representation of the eight variables studied in only two dimensions. Results There was no correlation between bullying and variables related to the individual and the environment. Maxillary overjet and self-perception related to the need for orthodontic treatment were important to explain the data variability. Conclusions Malocclusion did not correlate with bullying history. However, increased maxillary overjet influences adolescent self-perception, suggesting a potential condition for bullying events.

The use of a ternary photoactivation system containing an iodonium salt in bonding composites may allow bonding brackets to enamel using reduced light exposure times.

Objectives To evaluate the impact of anterior occlusal conditions in the mixed dentition on item-level analysis of oral health–related quality of life (OHRQoL). Materials and Methods A population-based cross-sectional study of 787 children aged 8 to 10 years was conducted. The Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ8-10) was used to evaluate OHRQoL, and the analysis of item levels was performed on CPQ8-10 domains. Anterior occlusal characteristics were diagnosed according to the Dental Aesthetic Index criteria. Individual analyses were performed relating the outcome as independent variables. The variables with P < .20 in the individual analyses were tested in multiple logistic regression models, and those with P < .10 remained in the model. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) was estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results No associations were found with regard to anterior occlusal characteristics (P < .001) after the variables of the previous determinants were adjusted for multivariate analysis. However, the following variables were significantly associated with negative impact on OHRQoL item levels: sex, in oral symptoms (OR = 1.42; CI, 1.07–1.89) and emotional well-being (OR = 1.34; CI, 1.00–1.79); race, in oral symptoms (OR = 1.48; CI, 1.10–1.98), emotional well-being (OR = 1.54; CI, 1.14–2.06), and social well-being (OR = 1.34; CI, 1.00–1.80); and family income in functional limitation (OR = 1.46; CI, 1.06–2.02), emotional well-being (OR = 1.71; CI, 1.21–2.42), and social well-being (OR = 1.59; CI, 1.14–2.21). Conclusions Anterior occlusal conditions did not affect the levels of OHRQoL items.

Objectives To assess the esthetic impact of anterior occlusal conditions and malocclusion severity levels. Materials and Methods A population-based cross-sectional study of 700 adolescents aged 15 to 19 years was conducted. The Oral Aesthetic Subjective Impact Scale (OASIS) was used to evaluate the subjective esthetic impact of malocclusion. The Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) criteria were used to diagnose the anterior occlusal characteristics in isolation and the severity levels of malocclusion. The variables with P < .20 in the individual analyses were tested in multiple logistic regression models, and those with P < .10 remained in the model. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) was estimated with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Results Of the adolescents, 42% showed negative self-perception of malocclusion. In addition, 15.4% of adolescents had severe malocclusion (DAI 3) and 18.9% very severe malocclusion (DAI 4). Crowding and spacing were shown to be 2.90 (CI: 2.06–4.09) and 2.53 (CI: 1.65–3.86) times, respectively, more likely to cause a negative esthetic impact in adolescents (P < .05). In addition, adolescents with orthodontic treatment need (DAI 2, 3, and 4) were more likely to report a negative esthetic impact (P < .05). Conclusions Anterior crowding and spacing are the conditions that most influence the esthetic concern of adolescents. Adolescents with very severe malocclusion and higher orthodontic treatment need are more likely to report a negative esthetic impact.