The public perception of the differences between specialist orthodontists and general dentists: A comparison between Australia and Sweden.

INTRODUCTION: In Australia and Sweden, orthodontic treatments may be performed by either a general dental practitioner (GDP) or a specialist orthodontist. Evidence suggests that the public may easily confuse a GDP who provides orthodontic treatment with a specialist orthodontist. We conducted a survey of people in Australia and Sweden to assess their understanding of the differences between a specialist orthodontist and a GDP who provides orthodontic treatments. METHODS: The sample comprised 2006 Australian adults and 1010 Swedish adults who completed an online questionnaire. The survey examined the respondents' understanding of the difference between a GDP and a specialist orthodontist. Demographic data and the respondents' preference concerning future practitioner type were also collected. RESULTS: Although most of the responses between the countries were different with statistical significance (P <0.001), many similarities in the responses were observed. More than 90% of the respondents in both countries did not know the difference between a GDP who provides orthodontic treatment and a specialist orthodontist. Almost 75% believed that a specialist orthodontist was the most qualified practitioner to perform orthodontic treatment. Fewer than 10% of the respondents preferred to see a GDP for orthodontic treatment over a specialist. These people tended to be male, have less education, and be younger. Cost was identified as an important factor in choosing an orthodontic practitioner, particularly in the Australian sample. CONCLUSIONS: The clear majority of both Australian and Swedish respondents were unable to identify the difference between a specialist orthodontic and a GDP who provides orthodontic treatments.

Satisfactory outcomes after orthognathic surgery with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion using a hybrid device.

The self-reported functional outcomes, clinical findings, and results of dental cast analysis before and after orthognathic surgery with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME) using a hybrid rapid maxillary expander (RME) were evaluated. Data were collected from 43 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery with SARME using a hybrid RME between 2001 and 2013. The patients were recruited during a follow-up clinical examination and were required to complete a questionnaire about their opinions and self-reported functional outcomes. Dental casts were used to analyze posttreatment palatal expansion. The mean follow-up time was 68 months (range: 25-135 months). The most common indication for SARME was the presence of a crossbite. Of the 30 patients who underwent a follow-up clinical examination (69.8% answer rate), 4 (13.3%) had symptoms of temporomandibular disorder (TMD), 1 (3.3%) experienced myalgia, and 3 (10.0%) experienced arthralgia on clinical palpation. Cast analysis revealed significant palatal expansion. The intercanine distance, intermolar distance, and palatal height were increased by 3, 5, and 2 mm, respectively. Overall, the patients were satisfied with the preoperative information, improved functions, and aesthetic results. The prevalence of TMD symptoms and other side effects following orthognathic surgery with SARME using a hybrid RME was low, and significant palatal expansions were achieved.

Treatment of adolescent patients with class II division 1 malocclusion using Eruption guidance appliance: A comparative study with Twin-block and Activator-Headgear appliances.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance and short-term effects of eruption guidance appliance (EGA) in adolescents with class II division 1 malocclusion in comparison with twin-block appliance (TBA) and activator-headgear appliance (A-HG). Dental records of 1886 patients were viewed in this retrospective study 129 patients treated with one of these three functional appliances were identified. 123 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and data were extracted from the dental records. Gender, age, compliance, overjet change at every visit, number of appliance breakages and number of emergency visits apart from appliance breakage were studied. The data were analyzed with Chi-square test, General Linear Model and Fisher scoring test. Results showed that 47 patients were treated with EGA, 38 patients with TBA and 38 patients with A-HG. Mean ages starting the treatment were slightly lower with EGA (11.5 years) than with TBA (12.3 years) and A-HG (11.8 years). Non-compliance was higher in the EGA group (31.9%) than TBA group (26.3%) and A-HG group (23.7%). Mean overjet reduction per month was 0.6 mm for EGA which was lower than TBA group (0.7 mm) and A-HG groups (0.7 mm).The number of emergency visits and appliance breakage were lower in EGA group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the 3 groups regarding ages,compliance, mean overjet reduction, emergency visits and appliance breakage aspects. In conclusion, this study indicates that EGA is an alternative choice in the treatment of adolescent patients with class II division 1 malocclusion. However, long-term follow-up and cephalometric prospective study should be performed to continue our understanding more about the mechanisms of EGA and more definite conclusions can be made.

Expression of prostaglandin E synthases in periodontitis immunolocalization and cellular regulation.

The inflammatory mediator prostaglandin E(2) (PGE(2)) is implicated in the pathogenesis of chronic inflammatory diseases including periodontitis; it is synthesized by cyclooxygenases (COX) and the prostaglandin E synthases mPGES-1, mPGES-2, and cPGES. The distribution of PGES in gingival tissue of patients with periodontitis and the contribution of these enzymes to inflammation-induced PGE(2) synthesis in different cell types was investigated. In gingival biopsies, positive staining for PGES was observed in fibroblasts and endothelial, smooth muscle, epithelial, and immune cells. To further explore the contribution of PGES to inflammation-induced PGE(2) production, in vitro cell culture experiments were performed using fibroblasts and endothelial, smooth muscle, and mast cells. All cell types expressed PGES and COX-2, resulting in basal levels of PGE(2) synthesis. In response to tumor necrosis factor (TNF-α), IL-1ß, and cocultured lymphocytes, however, mPGES-1 and COX-2 protein expression increased in fibroblasts and smooth muscle cells, accompanied by increased PGE(2), whereas mPGES-2 and cPGES were unaffected. In endothelial cells, TNF-α increased PGE(2) production only via COX-2 expression, whereas in mast cells the cytokines did not affect PGE(2) enzyme expression or PGE(2) production. Furthermore, PGE(2) production was diminished in gingival fibroblasts derived from mPGES-1 knockout mice, compared with wild-type fibroblasts. These results suggest that fibroblasts and smooth muscle cells are important sources of mPGES-1, which may contribute to increased PGE(2) production in the inflammatory condition periodontitis.