Invisalign Lite: a cross-sectional investigation of orthodontist treatment-planning practices.

OBJECTIVES: To survey treatment-planning practices of orthodontists related to the Invisalign Lite clear aligner appliance (Align Technology, San Jose, Calif). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients satisfying inclusion and exclusion criteria and treated with Invisalign Lite were selected from a database containing more than 17,000 patients. Relevant data regarding treatment-planning practices were obtained from Align Technology's treatment-planning facility, ClinCheck, and evaluated. RESULTS: Most (n = 135; 79.9%) patients were female and had a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 30.5 (23.8, 43.1) years. The median (IQR) number of aligners for the sample was 23.0 (14, 28) for the maxilla and 24 (14, 28) for the mandible. Most (n = 122; 72.2%) patients required at least one additional series of aligners. More locations for interproximal reduction (IPR) were prescribed in the mandible (mean 1.91 [1.78]) than in the maxilla (1.03 [1.78]; P < .024) in the initial accepted plan of all patients. More teeth were prescribed composite resin (CR) attachments in the maxilla (P < .0001) in the initial accepted plan of all patients. Issues regarding tooth position protocols (n = 50; 53.3%) and requirement for additional IPR (n = 68; 45.3%) were reasons for treatment plan changes before acceptance of the initial treatment plan by orthodontists. CONCLUSIONS: More than 7 of 10 patients required at least one additional series of aligners after the initial series of Invisalign Lite aligners was completed. Prescription of IPR was more common in the mandible, and prescription of CR attachments was more common in the maxilla.

Orthodontic clear aligners and TikTok videos: A content, reliability and quality analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The social media platform, TikTok, has the potential to disseminate orthodontic information to an enormous global audience. The aim of this investigation was to assess the content, reliability and quality of videos regarding orthodontic clear aligners (OCAs) on the TikTok platform. METHODS: Three search terms were used to identify relevant videos. Characteristics such as video source and the number of views were documented. An 8-point information domain score was applied to categorise the videos as "not useful", "slightly useful", "moderately useful" and "very useful". The DISCERN tool and the Global Quality Score (GQS) were used to evaluate video reliability and quality. Intraclass coefficients (ICC) were computed for intrarater reliability. Statistical analyses were via IBM® SPSS®, version 27.0.0.0 (SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL, USA). RESULTS: Of the 117 videos that satisfied inclusion/exclusion criteria, most were uploaded by laypersons (44.4%) and orthodontists (35.9%). The assessed videos had over 300 million views. The overall mean (SD) number of information domains present in the videos was 1.85/8 (1.73). Most videos were deemed "slightly useful" (54.7%) or "not useful" (26.5%). The overall mean (SD) DISCERN score was 1.8/5 (1.28). The overall mean (SD) GQS was 2.48/5 (0.86). Higher DISCERN scores correlated with higher GQS (r=0.73; P<0.01). ICC scores (0.92-0.94) indicated excellent intrarater reliability. CONCLUSIONS: The content, reliability and quality of videos found on TikTok related to OCAs was poor. The orthodontic profession must direct patients to reliable and high-quality resources as well as uploading content onto TikTok to counteract the deficiencies highlighted in this study.