Comparison of maxillary anterior tooth movement between Invisalign and fixed appliances.

INTRODUCTION: This research project aimed to compare the number of maxillary incisors and canine movement between Invisalign and fixed orthodontic appliances using artificial intelligence and identify any limitations of Invisalign. METHODS: Sixty patients (Invisalign, n = 30; braces, n = 30) were randomly selected from the Ohio State University Graduate Orthodontic Clinic archive. Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) analysis was used to indicate the severity of the patients in both groups. To analyze the incisors and canine movement, specific landmarks were identified on incisors and canines using an artificial intelligence framework, two-stage mesh deep learning. Total average tooth movement in the maxilla and individual (incisors and canine) tooth movement in 6 directions (buccolingual, mesiodistal, vertical, tipping, torque, rotation) were then analyzed at a significance level of α = 0.05. RESULTS: Based on the posttreatment Peer Assessment Rating scores, the quality of finished patients in both groups was similar. In maxillary incisors and canines, there was a significant difference in movement between Invisalign and conventional appliances for all 6 movement directions (P <0.05). The greatest differences were with rotation and tipping of the maxillary canine, along with incisor and canine torque. The smallest statistical differences observed for incisors and canines were crown translational tooth movement in the mesiodistal and buccolingual directions. CONCLUSIONS: When comparing fixed orthodontic appliances to Invisalign, patients treated with fixed appliances were found to have significantly more maxillary tooth movement in all directions, especially with rotation and tipping of the maxillary canine.

Development of a simple and valid nutrition screening tool for pediatric hospitalized patients with acute illness.

Background: Nutritional screening, intervention and assessment in patients with undernutrition are key components of any nutritional care. The goal of any nutritional assessment is to determine the specific nutritional risk(s). Presently, there are no guidelines on any ideal screening tool to be used on admission for identification of children that are at risk of developing malnutrition during their hospital stay. The objective of the study was to develop a valid and simple nutritional screening tool which can be used on hospital admission to identify pediatric patients at risk of malnutrition .Methods: This study was cross sectional analytical that enrolled children (n:161) admitted with acute illness to the general wards at Cairo University Children Hospitals (CUCH). The answers to the developed questionnaire were compared to the Subjective Global Assessment (SGA), those with high accuracy (≥80%) were used for validity with anthropometric measures. Results: In the 'less than two years of age' group, the simple and valid nutritional screening tools were the following questions: (Is there a problem during breast-feeding?), (Is there scanty breast milk?), (Is there appetite loss?). The simple and valid nutritional screening tools during the 'early childhood' group were the following questions: (Is there appetite loss?), (Is there any skipping of meals?), (Are they watching TV, videotapes and/or playing computer games for more than two hours/day?). The simple and valid  nutritional screening tools during the 'late childhood' group were the following questions: (Is there appetite loss?), (Are they watching TV, videotapes and/or playing computer games for more than two hours/day?). Conclusion: The simple and valid nutritional screening tools differ according to age groups. The one which is valid in all ages is the question about the appetite loss.