Is there a common pattern of dental specialties in the world? Orthodontics, the constant element.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of studies comparing the status of dental specialties worldwide. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the differences and similarities between the number and types of dental specialties in 31 countries, including every continent, in the world. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Available official documents and webpages from regulatory bodies, official colleges and councils, and dental institutions were collected from 31 countries and analyzed to obtain reliable data on dental specialties. Differences were analyzed using the Lorentz curve and Gini test. Additionally, a cluster analysis was performed to obtain groups of countries with similar patterns in the number and types of dental specialties. RESULTS: A total of 32 different specialties were officially recognized among all the analyzed countries. Orthodontics and oral surgery (100% and 93.1%, respectively) were the two most frequently officially recognized dental specialties worldwide. The total global degree of inequality in the 31 analyzed countries was 42.4%. The Anglo-Saxon countries showed the greatest similarity, approximately 15-fold higher than the European countries. Cluster analysis differentiated six main groups of countries according to the number and types of dental specialties. European countries formed one of the two largest clusters, and the other cluster was of Anglo-Saxon, Asian, African, and several Eastern European countries with a high number of specialties. CONCLUSIONS: Officially recognized dental specialties in the different continents and countries show an asymmetric organization. The number, names, and skills of officially recognized dental specialties exhibited significant differences, showing inequalities in their organization. The Anglo-Saxon pattern of dental specialties showed greater equality than the European pattern. Orthodontics was the only constant element among the different patterns.

European inequalities and similarities in officially recognized dental specialties.

BACKGROUND: Although the European Economic Space usually acts in a united and organized way, several main differences are found regarding the type and number of dental specialties all around this group of member states. The aim of the study is to analyse the inequalities and similarities existing between 21 European countries, highlighting the number and types of recognized dental specialties. METHODS: Available official documents and webpages from 20 out of the 30 countries of which the European Economic Space is comprised plus the United Kingdom (UK), were analysed to obtain reliable data referred to dental specialties. Differences were tested with the Lorentz curve and Gini test. Additionally, a Cluster analysis was performed to obtain groups of countries with a similar pattern in the number and type of dental specialties. RESULTS: Up to a total of 15 different specialties are officially recognized in all the analysed countries. Orthodontics (90%) and Oral Surgery (81%) are the two most frequently recognized specialties. The total global degree of inequality of the analysed countries was 40.2%. Cluster analysis differentiated three different main groups of countries according to the number and type of dental specialties. CONCLUSIONS: The situation of dental specialties in the area of the EES plus the UK exhibits an unequal organization. Cluster analysis showed 3 main clusters of countries with a similar pattern of dental specialties.

Differences in the Ratios of General and Dental Specialists in Europe.

BACKGROUND: The European Economic Area (EEA) is composed of member states with a multitude of different regions. This study aimed to analyse the ratios of general dentists and dental specialists to the total population and the proportion of dental specialists to general dentists in 24 European countries and to explore specific intranational differences within 2 countries: France and Germany. METHODS: Available official documents and webpages from the United Kingdom and 23 of the 30 countries comprising the EEA were analysed. Data were expressed as absolute values, ratios of general dentists and dental specialists in the total of population, and percentages of dental specialists/dentists. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to clarify the main ratios that distinguish France from Germany, and cluster analysis was employed to determine similar areas. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between countries, with Ireland and Austria having the lowest ratio of dentists and Romania and Greece having the highest. The Czech Republic, the Netherlands, France, and Denmark had the lowest ratios of dental specialists to the total population. Lithuania, Sweden, and Germany had the highest number of dental specialists. Orthodontists were the most numerous specialists (5.0% of dentists), followed by oral surgeons (2.7%). In France, differences between departments were pronounced and associated with the presence of dental schools and per capita income. In Germany, only the correlation between per capita income and the density of oral surgeons was significant. CONCLUSIONS: Diverse ratios of general dentists and dental specialists to the total population and the proportion of dental specialists to general dentists were discovered within the examined countries, and their maximum values were 2.5, 5.7, and 4.1 times the minimum values, respectively. Differences were even found within the same country, as was the case in France and, to a lesser extent, in Germany.

Morphological integration of mandible and cranium: orthodontic implications.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed at clarifying the morphological interactions among the cranial base, face, and mandible, to improve the assessment and treatment of skeletal malocclusions involving the mandible. DESIGN: Untreated adult subjects (n=187) were grouped according to standard cephalometric criteria of vertical and sagittal relationships. Geometric morphometrics were used to test the null hypothesis that integration patterns between the mandible and its associated basicranial and upper midfacial counterparts would be similar among various vertical and sagittal facial patterns. RESULTS: The null hypothesis was rejected for vertical groups, because the dolicho- and brachyfacial subjects showed significantly different integration patterns, but was accepted for sagittal groups, which showed identical covariation patterns. The morphological integration between the cranium-face and mandible were similarly high in the three skeletal classes, which explained the similarly large covariance between the two structures (57.80% in Class II to 60% in Class III). CONCLUSIONS: Dolicho- and brachi-facial subjects showed specific and different cranium-face and associated mandible configurations. The cranium-face configuration may have an important influence (∼60%) on the generation of sagittal (anteroposterior) skeletal malocclusions. The remaining morphological component of the skeletal malocclusion (∼40%) would be independent of this particular integration (PLS1) between the cranium-face and mandible.

Apiñamiento dentario y crecimiento mandibular. Revisión bibliográfica y análisis / No disponible

En este trabajo analizamos el apiñamiento dentario en relación con el crecimiento mandibular que se produce en la edad pre- y peripuberal, siendo valorado a través de los parámetros Ar-Go, Go-Gn y Ar-Gn. Para ello seleccionamos dos muestras, una con apiñamiento dentario mandibular severo de 31 pacientes (G.A) y otra sin apiñamiento de 30 pacientes (G.C), todos ellos con clase I esquelética y edades comprendidas entre los 10 y los 16 años. Las tasas de crecimiento fueron mayores tanto en el G.C. respecto al G.A. como en los varones respecto a las mujeres, pero las diferencias no alcanzaron la significación estadística. Según nuestros resultados la presencia de un marcado apiñamiento dentario en la arcada inferior no se asocia a una reducción significativa de las diferentes tasas de desarrollo anual longitudinal y vertical mandibular. El agotamiento del crecimiento mandibular horizontal parece acontecer de forma más temprana que el de naturaleza vertical, siendo además más precoz en las mujeres que en los varones (AU)

The relationship between dental crowding and mandibular growth in the pre and peripubertal ages were analysed with the aid of Ar-Go, Go-Gn and Ar-Gn measurements. Two patient populations were studied; one with severe mandibular dental crowding of 31 patients (G.A.) and another with dental crowding of 30 patients(G.C.), all of them with a Class I skeletal relationship and between 10 and 16 years of age. Growth rates were higher in the G.C. group compared with G.A. group and in males compared with females patients, but differences were not statistically significant in this study. Presence of a severe arch-length deficiency in the mandibular arch is not associated with a significant reduction in vertical and longitudinal mandibular annual growth rates in our results. Draining-off of residual horizontal mandibular growth seems to take place earlier than vertical growth and also in females than in males (AU)

Ortondoncia: Perspectivas y líneas de desarrollo / No disponible

La ortodoncia, como cualquier otra disciplina científica, está sometida a un permanente cambio en sus fundamentaciones científicas y en sus protocolos de actuación clínica. Para comprobar la importancia de tales cambios desde un punto de vista empírico y retrospectivo nos basta con contrastar nuestra actuación clínica actual frente a la que desarrollábamos 5 o 10 años atrás. Sin embargo, en este trabajo nuestra valoración pretende ser prospectiva, esto es, un intento de determinar las futuras líneas de desarrollo de la ortodoncia, con las obvias limitaciones que implica cualquier predicción futura. Para ello nos centraremos en el análisis de las publicaciones ortodóncicas científicas de los 12 últimos años, con especial valoración de las de los tres últimos años. Ello nos llevará a identificar las previsibles líneas de crecimiento de la ortodoncia (AU)

Orthodontics, as well as any other scientific discipline, constantly undergoes change in its scientific foundations and clinical protocols. To verify the importance of these changes from an empirical and retrospective point of view, we simply need to compare our clinical practice today with that of 5 or 10 years ago. However, in this study we adopt a prospective view in our assessment, that ¡s, it aims to determine future lines of development in orthodontics bearing in mind the obvious limitations of such predictions. As a result, we will focus on analyzing the last 12 years of scientific orthodontic publications and center our attention on the past 3 years. This will allow us to identify the foreseeable lines of growth in orthodontics (AU)