The results emphasize the importance of self-perception in determining how participants perceive several important aspects of the treatment experience throughout the life course. Further studies should focus on how to incorporate self-perception as an important variable and outcome in the treatment process.

Introduction: Pursuing an esthetically-pleasing orthodontic outcome, orthodontic patients must consider and choose from the different available options of orthodontic appliance. Practitioners need to be better informed of their customers’ preferences to make better practice management decisions and satisfy their patients’ needs.PurposeTo explore adult laypeople’s perceptions of the attractiveness, acceptability, preference and economic value of different orthodontic appliances when they consider these appliances for themselves and for their children.Patients and methodsThis cross-sectional survey included 199 adults (110 females). The average age of participants was 27.7 years. Participants answered a questionnaire evaluating and comparing multiple smiling images of an adult wearing different orthodontic appliances. Participants rated each appliance for: (1) attractiveness on a Likert scale; (2) acceptability of having the appliance placed for themselves and their children (with a yes/no response); (3) preference (by ranking all appliances in order); and (4) economic value (by providing the additional amount they are willing to pay for each appliance for themselves and their children).ResultsWe found a statistically significant difference in the attractiveness scores between the different orthodontic appliances (p< 0.0001). The most attractive appliances were clear aligners and lingual brackets. The least attractive appliances were colored o-tied-brackets followed by shaped-brackets. Clear aligners were the most acceptable appliances among our participants to have placed on themselves (86.9%) and their children (84.9%). Shaped brackets were the least acceptable appliances among our participants to have placed on themselves (24.1%) and their children (36.2%). The most preferred appliances were lingual brackets (39.2%), followed by clear aligners (34.17%). The least preferred appliances were colored o-tied-brackets (4%). Participants varied with regards to how much more they were willing to pay for each of the different orthodontic appliances. The majority were willing to pay more for clear aligners and lingual brackets to have them placed on themselves but not to have them placed on their children.ConclusionAdults preferred more innovative esthetic appliances over traditional ones and were willing to pay more to have them placed on themselves but not on their children.

Background Orthodontic treatment may result in undesirable side effects, such as root resorption and a decrease in the size of the pulp tissue which could be associated with the duration of the orthodontic treatment. Piezocision-assisted tooth movement was introduced as a minimally invasive surgical procedure to shorten orthodontic treatment time. This prospective randomized clinical trial was aimed to compare the pulp volume changes of maxillary anterior teeth after en-masse retraction with or without piezocision-assisted orthodontics. Methods Patients who required orthodontic treatment with bilateral maxillary first premolar extractions and en-masse retraction were recruited. Patients were randomly divided into extraction with piezocision, or only extraction, serving as controls. Pulp volume and root length changes of the maxillary six anterior teeth were measured and compared between the two groups using a 3-Dimensional analytical software. Paired and independent sample t-tests were used to compare within and between groups. Bivariate correlation was done between the mean change in pulp volume and its corresponding root length. The significance level was set at α = 0.05. Results A total of 23 patients were included, 12 in the piezocision, and 11 in the control group. At the end of the en-masse retraction phase, (mean = 122.74 ± 3.06 days) pulp volume was significantly decreased in all six anterior teeth in both groups (P < 0.01). The decrease in pulp volume was not statistically different between both groups, (P > 0.05). There was a statistically significant but moderate correlation only between the pulp volume change of the right canine and its root length, r = 0.44, P = 0.034. Conclusions The effect of piezocision-assisted orthodontic tooth movement on the pulp volume was comparable to the conventional orthodontic treatment. The degree of change in pulp volume does not appear to be related to the amount of root resorption. Trial registration NCT03180151. Registered December 25, 2016, retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT03180151.

Purpose: To explore youth perception of the esthetics of different orthodontic appliances measured using different concepts of esthetics. Patients and Methods: A questionnaire was answered by 194 youth participants (35.5% were 9-11 years old; 32.5% were 12-14 years old; and 32% were 15-17 years old). Participants evaluated and compared the attractiveness of images of different orthodontic appliances using a Likert scale. They indicated the acceptability of the appliances with a yes/ no answer. They then chose which appliance to rank as their most preferred. Results: The highest median attractiveness rating was for clear aligners (Mdn= 8, IQR= 4.25), followed by lingual and standard ceramic brackets (Mdn= 7, IQR= 6). The lowest median attractiveness rating was for hybrid brackets (Mdn= 4, IQR= 4). Clear aligners were significantly more attractive than all other orthodontic appliances (P<0.0001). Clear aligners also had the highest percentage of acceptability (80%), while hybrid brackets scored the lowest (42%). Ceramic and metal brackets fell in the middle range of attractiveness and acceptability but were chosen by male middle schoolers as their preferred appliances. Clear aligners were ranked the highest by this cohort. Conclusion:This study demonstrates the widespread preference and acceptability of clear aligners among the youth. Other orthodontic appliances were acceptable but to a lesser extent than clear aligners. This study informs orthodontists about their youth consumers' behavior and may help inform treatment discussions in the orthodontic clinic.