The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Orthodontic Adult Patients' Characteristics and Decision on Orthodontic Appliance.

Purpose: There is an overall paucity of data examining the specific details of orthodontic patients' patterns or orthodontic service disruptions possibly influenced by COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthodontic clinic disruption regarding the change in adult patients' characteristics and decisions of orthodontic treatment devices. Patients and Methods: A retrospective sample of 311 patients receiving orthodontic treatment from 2018 to 2022 were collected and divided into two groups: before (n = 167) and during (n = 144) the COVID-19 pandemic. Demographics, dental indices, the index of complexity outcome and need (ICON), and the degree of treatment difficulty were analyzed. Results: There were fewer students among patients during the COVID-19 pandemic than before (24.5% versus 35.9%, P = 0.036). Compared with patients before the pandemic, more patients selected ceramic brackets or Invisalign during the pandemic (P = 0.022). There were higher percentage of class I dental malocclusions among patients during than before the COVID-19 pandemic (P = 0.044). Moreover, the ICON score and the score of the degree of treatment difficulty were both significantly lower for patients during than before the COVID-19 pandemic (63.9±14.0 versus 58.3±15.3, P=0.001 and 7.4±2.6 versus 6.8±2.6, P=0.049, respectively). Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic influenced the characteristics and decisions of orthodontic patients. Those who still came to the orthodontic clinic despite the COVID-19 outbreak may have been those with less malocclusion severity and treatment difficulty. Besides, during the time of covid-19 pandemic, more patients chose ceramic bracket and Invisalign as their orthodontic treatment device rather than conventional or self-ligating metal brackets.

Characteristics and Dental Indices of Orthodontic Patients Using Aligners or Brackets.

Background. Clear aligners have become a treatment alternative to metal brackets in recent years due to the advantages of aesthetics, comfort, and oral health improvement. Nevertheless, few studies have analyzed the clinical characteristics and dental indices of orthodontic patients using aligners or brackets. Methods. A total of 170 patients received orthodontic treatment at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital in 2021. Patients were stratified by types of treatment (Invisalign® clear aligner (n = 60) or metal bracket (n = 110). Results: Patients were aged 26.1 ± 7.2 years, and most were female (75.0%). The Invisalign® group was older than the bracket group (p = 0.003). The skeletal relationships were mainly Class I (49.4%), followed by Class II (30.0%) and Class III (20.6%). The molar relationships were primarily Class I (38.8%), followed by Class II (37.1%) and Class III (24.1%). The decayed, missing, and filled tooth (DMFT) index was 9.9 ± 6.0, including 2.1 ± 2.9 for decayed teeth, 0.5 ± 1.1 for missing teeth, and 7.3 ± 4.3 for filled teeth. There were no significant differences in the DMFT index or skeletal and molar relationships between the groups (p > 0.05). The index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) was 56.8 ± 13.5, and the score was lower in the Invisalign® group than in the bracket group (p = 0.002). Among the variables included in the ICON assessment, only the aesthetic variable was lower in the Invisalign® group than in the bracket group (p < 0.001). The Frankfort-mandibular plane angle was 27.9 ± 5.1 degrees. Finally, the E-line of the lower lip was lower in the Invisalign® group than in the bracket group (1.5 ± 2.4 versus 2.8 ± 3.1, p = 0.005). Conclusions. Older patients showed a greater intention to choose Invisalign® treatment for improving the appearance of their teeth than younger patients, who chose metal bracket treatment. The demand for Invisalign® aligner treatment for aesthetic reasons was substantial. A soft tissue profile with more protrusive lower lips and a greater need for orthodontic treatment was found in the bracket group.

Environmental Cadmium Exposure and Dental Indices in Orthodontic Patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that environmental cadmium exposure could disrupt salivary gland function and is associated with dental caries and reduced bone density. Therefore, this cross-sectional study attempted to determine whether tooth decay with tooth loss following cadmium exposure is associated with some dental or skeletal traits such as malocclusions, sagittal skeletal pattern, and tooth decay. METHODS: Between August 2019 and June 2020, 60 orthodontic patients with no history of previous orthodontics, functional appliances, or surgical treatment were examined. The patients were stratified into two groups according to their urine cadmium concentrations: high (>1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 28) or low (<1.06 µg/g creatinine, n = 32). RESULTS: The patients were 25.07 ± 4.33 years old, and most were female (female/male: 51/9 or 85%). The skeletal relationship was mainly Class I (48.3%), followed by Class II (35.0%) and Class III (16.7%). Class I molar relationships were found in 46.7% of these patients, Class II molar relationships were found in 15%, and Class III molar relationships were found in 38.3%. The mean decayed, missing, and filled surface (DMFS) score was 8.05 ± 5.54, including 2.03 ± 3.11 for the decayed index, 0.58 ± 1.17 for the missing index, and 5.52 ± 3.92 for the filled index. The mean index of complexity outcome and need (ICON) score was 53.35 ± 9.01. The facial patterns of these patients were within the average low margin (26.65 ± 5.53 for Frankfort-mandibular plane angle (FMA)). There were no significant differences in the above-mentioned dental indices between patients with high urine cadmium concentrations and those with low urine cadmium concentrations. Patients were further stratified into low (<27, n = 34), average (27-34, n = 23), and high (>34, n = 3) FMA groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the urine cadmium concentration among the three groups. Nevertheless, a marginally significant p-value of 0.05 for urine cadmium concentration was noted between patients with low FMA and patients with high FMA. CONCLUSION: This analysis found no association between environmental cadmium exposure and dental indices in our orthodontic patients.