ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the perceived efficacy of aligners (Invisalign; Align Technology, Santa Clara, Calif) at performing extrusive movements of maxillary lateral incisors and to evaluate and compare differences in treatment planning protocols and other interventions used when required between orthodontists and general dentists with various degrees of experience. METHODS: An original 18-question survey was sent by mail to a randomized and geographically proportionate selection of orthodontic specialists (N = 400) and general dentists (N = 400) listed as providers on the Invisalign Web site. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance and chi-square tests. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six providers responded to the survey (15.8% response rate), including 36 general dentists and 90 orthodontists. Overall, the average perceived efficacy was 4.71 out of 10 (95% confidence interval, 4.28-5.14). The threshold for identification of tracking issues was significantly associated with provider type (P = 0.0305). General dentists were significantly more likely to prefer an optimized attachment (P = 0.0001), whereas orthodontists were significantly more likely to prefer a gingivally-beveled horizontal rectangular attachment (P <0.0001). A refinement scan was the most common intervention method, followed by the bootstrap technique. CONCLUSIONS: The average perceived efficacy for extruding maxillary lateral incisors with aligners was 4.71 out of 10. Orthodontists had a lower tolerance than general dentists for tracking issues. A refinement scan was the most common method of intervention. General dentists and orthodontists differed in their treatment planning preferences and timing of intervention.
