Civil liability of orthodontists and aligner manufacturers in the treatment with orthodontic aligners

ABSTRACT Introduction: The use of clear aligners as an alternative to fixed orthodontic appliances has become popular due to the aesthetic demands of adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment. However, orthodontists' lack of knowledge about the legal consequences of their activities, and the lack of solid scientific evidence raise concerns regarding civil liability in this type of treatment. Marketing campaigns of manufacturing companies often exaggerate promises of results, and ignore the lack of scientific evidence. Patients, as consumers, are protected by the Consumer Protection Code, whereas orthodontists are considered treatment providers. Therefore, they can be held liable for damage caused to patients, whether by subjective or objective fault. Objective: This article aims to identify the civil responsibilities of orthodontists and aligner manufacturing companies, by means of a literature review, providing basic legal guidance to help professionals protect themselves from possible lawsuits related to treatment with orthodontic aligners. Conclusions: The study highlights the importance of knowledge of legal notions in treatments with orthodontic aligners by orthodontists, who should legally safeguard themselves through individual written contracts, avoiding obligation of results. In addition, in cases of legal claims, it is possible that the manufacturing companies are jointly and severally liable for possible damages claimed by the patient.

RESUMO Introdução: O uso de alinhadores transparentes como alternativa aos aparelhos ortodônticos fixos tem se tornado popular, devido às demandas estéticas dos pacientes adultos em busca de tratamento ortodôntico. No entanto, a falta de conhecimento dos ortodontistas sobre as consequências jurídicas de suas atividades, e a falta de evidências científicas sólidas levantam preocupações em relação à responsabilidade civil nesse tipo de tratamento. Muitas vezes, as campanhas de marketing das empresas fabricantes exageram nas promessas de resultados e desconsideram a falta de evidências científicas. O paciente, como consumidor, é protegido pelo Código de Defesa do Consumidor, e o ortodontista é considerado um fornecedor de tratamento. Portanto, ele pode ser responsabilizado por danos causados ao paciente, seja por culpa subjetiva ou objetiva. Objetivo: Identificar, por meio de uma revisão bibliográfica, as responsabilidades civis dos ortodontistas e das empresas fabricantes de alinhadores, fornecendo orientações jurídicas básicas para ajudar os profissionais a se protegerem de possíveis demandas judiciais relacionadas ao tratamento com alinhadores ortodônticos. Conclusões: O estudo destaca a importância do conhecimento de noções jurídicas em tratamentos com alinhadores ortodônticos, devendo o profissional resguardar-se juridicamente por meio de contratos individuais por escrito, prevenindo-se de assumir uma obrigação de resultado com o paciente. Além disso, em casos de demandas judiciais, é possível que as empresas fabricantes respondam solidariamente a possíveis danos reclamados pelo paciente.

Comparison of the reproducibility of two cervical vertebrae maturation methods

Aim: Facial orthopaedic treatments based on the stimulation or restrictions of craniofacial bone growth are more effective when carried out during the pubertal growth spurt. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate the reproducibility of two cervical vertebrae methods (CVM) with manual tracing and direct visual inspection. Methods: A sample of 60 lateral cephalometric radiographs (10 of each of the 6 CVM stages) was randomly selected from 171 records. 5 orthodontists classified these radiographs according to the skeletal maturation stage in 2002 and 2005, and the application of both methods was conducted by direct visual inspection and evaluation through manual tracing. Results: The average reliability of the two methods determination and the two forms of evaluation was substantial. The direct visual inspection evaluation showed the highest reliability and agreement interexaminer values for both methods, as well as the intraexaminers evaluation. Conclusion: The reproducibility of CVM method was substantial, indicating its clinical use to determine the skeletal maturity and the ideal moment for treatment execution