Class II division 1: an evidence-based review of management and treatment timing in the growing patient

Barber, Sophy; Forde, Katherine; Spencer, Roy W.

doi:10.12968/denu.2015.42.7.632

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2018

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Book1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Myobrace versus twin block in the treatment of class II malocclusion in Children: A systematic review

Rezky Oktaviyani Rusli,

Harun Achmad,

Wesley Kuandinata

et al. 2024

The Saudi Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Myobrace versus twin block in the treatment of class II malocclusion in Children: A systematic review

Rezky Oktaviyani Rusli,

Harun Achmad,

Wesley Kuandinata

et al. 2024

The Saudi Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paedodontic–orthodontic interface

Gillgrass¹,

Keightley²

2018

Paediatric Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The long-term management of a child’s developing occlusion often benefits greatly from a good working relationship between the paediatric dentist and the orthodontist. Typical problems range from minimizing damage to the occlusion caused by enforced extraction of poor-quality teeth, through the management of specific local abnormalities such as impacted teeth, to referral for comprehensive treatment of all aspects of the malocclusion. This chapter discusses the principles underlying when to refer to a specialist colleague, and looks at some common clinical situations where collaboration is often needed. From the age of 8 years all children should be screened for the presence of malocclusion when they attend for a routine dental examination. Although orthodontic treatment is usually carried out in the late mixed and early permanent dentition, some conditions benefit from treatment at an earlier stage. The screening need only be a brief clinical assessment, but it should be carried out systematically to ensure that no important findings are overlooked. An outline of a basic orthodontic assessment is given in Table 15.1. With practice this can be carried out quite quickly to give an overall impression of the nature and severity of a malocclusion. In essence, it comprises assessments of the following elements: • the patient’s awareness of their malocclusion (the complaint, if any) • their general level of dental awareness • an extra-oral examination of facial form (skeletal pattern and soft tissues) • general oral condition—oral hygiene, periodontal health, caries risk, and tooth quality • the presence or absence of all teeth • the alignment and form of each arch • the teeth in occlusion. Radiographs are not routinely used when screening for the presence of malocclusion and should only be taken when there is a clinical indication. A panoramic radiograph gives a useful general scan of the dentition and indicates the presence or absence of teeth. Modern digital panoramic radiographs are generally of good enough quality to assess for the presence of any abnormalities or gross caries. Intra-oral views may be indicated if specifically indicated by the history/examination (e.g. dental trauma) or for further investigation of pathology found on a panoramic image. A radiographic assessment must always be made when considering any extractions.

show abstract

Class II division 1: an evidence-based review of management and treatment timing in the growing patient

Cited by 2 publications

References 25 publications

Myobrace versus twin block in the treatment of class II malocclusion in Children: A systematic review

Myobrace versus twin block in the treatment of class II malocclusion in Children: A systematic review

The paedodontic–orthodontic interface

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About