A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot orthodontic bracket systems: part 1-duration of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare treatment duration between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot systems and determine factors influencing treatment duration. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eligible participants aged 12 years or over were allocated to the 0.018-inch or 0.022-inch slot MBT appliance (3M-Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA) using block randomization in groups of 10. Outcome measures included duration of: 1. overall treatment, 2. levelling and alignment, 3. working and finishing, and 4. appointment numbers and other treatment-related factors. Parametric tests (independent samples t-test) and non-parametric tests (chi-square with Fisher's exact tests and Mann-Whitney U-test) assessed differences between groups. A multiple linear regression analysis identified factors influencing treatment duration (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Of the 187 participants randomized (1:1 ratio), 34 withdrew or were excluded (protocol deviations or poor cooperation). There were 77 patients in the 0.018-inch slot group and 76 patients in the 0.022-inch slot group (overall mean age: 19.1 years). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (P > 0.05). The mean duration of treatment for the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot groups was 29.3 and 31.2 months, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups in terms of treatment duration, duration of the key stages of treatment, and number of appointments (P > 0.05). The regression analysis revealed 33.0 per cent of variance in treatment duration was explained by age at bonding, Class II division 2 malocclusion, number of failed appointments, number of emergency appointments, and transfer to another clinician. There were no adverse events. LIMITATIONS: It was impossible to blind clinicians or patients to allocation and oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes were not assessed. CONCLUSIONS: There was no statistically or clinically significant difference in treatment duration between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems. Increasing patient age, Class II division 2 malocclusion, number of failed and emergency appointments, and multi-operator treatment all increase orthodontic treatment duration. REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 March 2014, registration number: NCT02080338. PROTOCOL: The protocol was published at DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-389.

A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot orthodontic bracket systems: part 3-biological side-effects of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) and patient perception of pain during orthodontic treatment between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eligible participants aged 12 years or above were allocated to treatment with the 0.018-inch or 0.022-inch slot MBT appliance (3M Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA) using block randomization in groups of 10. OIIRR was assessed radiographically using standardized periapical radiographs before and after 9 months from the start of treatment. Patient perception of pain was assessed using a validated patient questionnaire at 6 months from the start of treatment. Parametric tests (t-test) and non-parametric tests (chi-square with Fisher's exact tests and Kruskal-Wallis test) assessed differences between the groups (P < 0.05). The correlation between severity of OIIRR and abnormal root morphology, history of dental trauma, and pain during treatment was assessed. RESULTS: Of the 187 participants randomized (1:1 ratio), 34 withdrew or were excluded (protocol deviations or poor cooperation). There were 77 patients in the 0.018-inch slot group and 76 patients in the 0.022-inch slot group (overall mean age: 19.1 years). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the severity of the OIIRR nor patient perception of pain between the two study groups (P = 0.115 and P = 0.08 respectively). The correlation between the severity of OIIRR and abnormal root morphology or history of dental trauma was not statistically significant (P = 0.086 and P = 0.313). Moreover, there was no significant correlation between the severity of OIIRR and pain during treatment (R = 0.045, P = 0.617). LIMITATIONS: It was impossible to blind clinicians or patients to allocation, and oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes were not assessed. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of bracket slot size on the severity of OIIRR and patient perception of pain are not significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 March 2014, registration number: NCT02080338.

A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot orthodontic bracket systems: part 2-quality of treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of orthodontic treatment between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Eligible participants aged 12 years or over were allocated to the 0.018-inch or 0.022-inch slot MBT appliance (3M-Unitek, Monrovia, California, USA) using block randomization in groups of 10. Outcome measures included: 1. ABO cast-radiograph evaluation (CR-EVAL), 2. peer assessment rating (PAR) scores, 3. incisor inclination, and 4. patient perception using the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need aesthetic component (IOTN AC) and three validated questionnaires before, during and after treatment. Parametric tests [independent samples t-test and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA)] and non-parametric tests (chi-square with Fisher's exact tests and Mann-Whitney U-test) assessed differences between groups (P < 0.05). RESULTS: Of the 187 participants randomized (1:1 ratio), 34 withdrew or were excluded (protocol deviations or poor cooperation). There were 77 patients in the 0.018-inch slot group and 76 patients in the 0.022-inch slot group (overall mean age: 19.1 years). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (P > 0.05). The mean total ABO CR-EVAL scores were 34.7 and 34.5; mean percentage PAR score reduction 74.1 per cent and 77.1 per cent; mean change for maxillary incisor inclination 2.9 degrees and 1.6 degrees and for mandibular incisor inclination 2.7 degrees and 1.4 degrees for the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch groups, respectively. Improvement in patient perception of aesthetics after treatment was statistically significant for both groups (P < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two treatment groups for ABO CR-EVAL, percentage PAR score reduction, incisor inclination, and patient perception of treatment (P > 0.05). No adverse events were observed during treatment. LIMITATIONS: It was impossible to blind clinicians or patients to allocation and oral hygiene and periodontal outcomes were not assessed. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically or clinically significant differences in the quality of occlusal outcomes, incisor inclination and patient perception of treatment between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems. REGISTRATION: The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on 5 March 2014, registration number: NCT02080338. PROTOCOL: The protocol was published at DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-389.

Attention deployment during memorizing and executing complex instructions.

We investigated the mental rehearsal of complex action instructions by recording spontaneous eye movements of healthy adults as they looked at objects on a monitor. Participants heard consecutive instructions, each of the form "move [object] to [location]". Instructions were only to be executed after a go signal, by manipulating all objects successively with a mouse. Participants re-inspected previously mentioned objects already while listening to further instructions. This rehearsal behavior broke down after 4 instructions, coincident with participants' instruction span, as determined from subsequent execution accuracy. These results suggest that spontaneous eye movements while listening to instructions predict their successful execution.

Forensic dental identification using two-dimensional photographs of a smile and three-dimensional dental models: A 2D-3D superimposition method.

Photographs of a person smiling may provide valuable information about their anterior dentition. These images can be an alternative ante-mortem (AM) dental source in cases with no dental records, which gives the forensic odontologist a significant opportunity for comparative dental analysis. There are no reported studies that have investigated the reliability of a superimposition technique using 2D photographs of a smile and 3D dental models in dental identification. The aim of this study was to explore novel odontological methods by combining 2D photographs with 3D dental models, simulating a dental identification scenario. The objective was to increase the accuracy of dental identification using an AM photograph with the aid of 3D imaging as an alternative to post-mortem (PM) photographs. The study comprised of 31 3D dental models (simulating PM information) and 35 digital photographs (simulating AM information). The data was analysed in two phases: Phase I- Visual Comparison of 2D-3D images and Phase II- 2D-3D superimposition after a wash out period. Both methods were analysed by the principal investigator. Further, one-third (ten) of the sample was evaluated by six raters (three experienced forensic odontologists and three forensic odontology MSc. students). The inter-rater agreement was assessed using intra-class correlation (ICC 2, 1, absolute). The results of the study suggest that the inter-rater and intra-rater reliability using 3D superimposition was highest (ICC ≈ 1.0). In summary, there was an increase in match rates and higher certainty among the opinions reached when using the 2D-3D superimposition method. The procedure attempted to reduce the limitations of previously existing 2D methods and is intended to assist forensic experts with an alternative method in dental identification when expressing conclusions on a case using photographs.

Automated Identification from Dental Data (AutoIDD): A new development in digital forensics.

There has been a significant expansion in the use of 3-dimensional (3D) dental images in recent years. In the field of forensic odontology, an automated 3D dental identification system could enhance the identification process. This study presents a novel method for automated human dental identification using 3D digital dental data by utilising a dental identification scenario. The total study sample was divided into two groups: Group A (120 dental models) and Group B (120 Intra-oral scans-IOS). Group A data was composed of 3D scanned dental models of post-orthodontic treated patients (30 maxillary and 30 mandibular). This data was considered as AM digital data. To generate an identical sample, the dental casts (60) of the same patients were retrieved and laser scanned. These models were considered as PM digital data. Group B data (IOS) was obtained from 30 study participants. To reconstruct a dental identification scenario 30 maxillary and 30 mandibular IOS were obtained from 30 participants and were considered as IOS-AM. After one year, another set of IOS (60) were acquired from the same participants and were considered as IOS-PM. The results showed that the AutoIDD (Automated Identification from Dental Data) software was consistent in accuracy; capable of differentiating "correct matches" (high match percentage) from "non-matches" (very low percentage) by 3D image superimposition. The match percentage of the maxillary and mandibular IOS ranged from 64 to 100% and 81-100 %, with a mean distance (mm) of 0.094 and 0.093 respectively. This study demonstrated the feasibility of using 3D scans through a new automated software - AutoIDD in digital forensics to assist the forensic expert in confirming the identity of a deceased individual from the available AM dental records.

Quantification of maxillary dental midline deviation in 2D photographs: Methodology trial.

INTRODUCTION: Discrepancy of the upper dental midline to the facial midline plays an important role in smile aesthetic assessment. This study presents different reference points to quantify the deviation of upper dental midline to the facial midline in 2D frontal photographs. The aim was to find the most accurate, precise, and practical reference points to measure dental midline discrepancy in 2D photographs. METHODOLOGY: A modified headset with a protractor was developed in order to achieve photographs in nine standardised head positions. Six reference points were used to detect the facial midline in the 2D photographs (eyebrows "EB", inner-canthus of the eyes "ICE", alae of the nose "AN", columella "C", nasolabial folds "NLF", and the philtrum "PH"). The deviation of the maxillary dental midline from the facial midline was measured and compared with clinical measurements. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Standard deviations (SD), Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), Method of Moments' Estimator (MME), 2-way repeated measures ANOVA, and multi-level linear model were used to estimate the true errors. RESULTS: The different reference points responded significantly differently to changes in head position and all showed measurement errors, which increased with greater head rotation. Alae of the nose showed the least measurement error and the greatest precision in all head positions. CONCLUSION: The alae of the nose are the recommended reference points to identify the facial midline in order to quantify dental midline deviation from frontal photographs.