Oral Health-Related Quality of Life among Adolescents in the First 6 Months of Fixed Orthodontic Therapy.

Clarification on disabilities that may arise during orthodontic treatment allows patients to have more realistic expectations. This prospective study assessed the impact of fixed orthodontic therapy on adolescents' quality of life over 6 months. A total of 78 adolescents aged 11-17 years were included. Quality of life was measured using the Child Perceptions Questionnaire (CPQ11-14, short form) at five moments: before treatment (T0), one week (T1), one month (T2), three months (T3), and six months (T4) after treatment initiation. Multiple and pairwise comparisons were conducted for CPQ11-14 scores (Friedman and Wilcoxon test; effect size). Changes in the quality of life were assessed as mean differences (T0-T1 and T0-T4) in total and domain scores (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney test) (α = 5%). Significant differences were observed between T0 and T4 in the oral symptoms' domain (p < 0.001), and between T0 and T1, T2, T3, and T4 for emotional well-being (p < 0.001 for all). Significant differences in impact were also found between T0 and T2, T3, and T4 with regard to social well-being (p = 0.004, =0.049, and <0.001, respectively). Orthodontic therapy positively impacted the emotional and social aspects of adolescents' quality of life. Negative effects were primarily related to pain, mouth sores, and difficulty biting or chewing. Understanding the symptoms and feelings of orthodontic patients aids professionals in decision-making.

Perception of malocclusion and school performance in adolescents: a systematic review.

This study aimed to assess the potential association between perception malocclusion and school performance in children and adolescents. An electronic search was performed in ten databases. Based on the PECO acronym (Population, Exposition, Comparator, and Outcome), the eligibility criteria included observational studies that compared the school performance of children and adolescents with and without the perception of malocclusion. There were no restrictions on the language or year of publication. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias by using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for cross-sectional studies. School performance was measured by analyzing student grades; levels of absenteeism; and child or adolescent self-perception and/or the perception of parents, guardians, close friends, and teachers regarding the impact of malocclusion on school performance. The data were described narratively/descriptively. The search resulted in 3,581 registers, of which eight were included in the qualitative synthesis. These studies were published between 2007 and 2021. Two studies concluded that there was no significant association between school performance and perception of malocclusion, five studies found that only some of the children with malocclusion had their school performance affected, and one study concluded that there was a significant association between perception of malocclusion and low school performance. Considering all variables and the very low certainty of evidence, the perception of malocclusion seems to negatively impact school performance when associated with external and subjective factors. Further studies using additional measurement standards are required.

Critical appraisal of confounding factors of observational studies on the association between dentofacial features and dental trauma in a Brazilian population.

AIMS/OBJECTIVES: Dental trauma is a highly prevalent dental emergency. Children and adolescents without inadequate lip coverage, increased overjet, and anterior open bite are associated with the occurrence of traumatic dental injuries. Observational studies do not allow the inference of causality, one of the reasons being: the potential confounding factors. Therefore, this review aimed to critically appraise the confounding factors considered in epidemiological studies that associate dentofacial features with the occurrence of dental trauma in Brazilian children and adolescents. METHODS: Studies included in the qualitative synthesis of a recently published comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on the topic were screened. Studies that only mentioned the performance of bivariate analyzes or that did not mention the performance of multivariate analyzes were excluded. Evaluation of control statements for possible confounders and bias consideration was performed for each selected study. Confounding factors in these studies were also identified and categorized according to their domains. RESULTS: Fifty-five observational studies were screened, of which 11 were excluded due to the mention of only bivariate analyzes or the lack of multivariate analyses. The remaining 44 studies were critically appraised. Of these, 9 studies specifically mentioned the term confounding, and 12 studies mentioned the term bias. However, only 14 studies mentioned limitations on confounding factors in their findings. Among the 99 different variables identified, the most used were type of trauma, followed by sex and age. CONCLUSION: Most studies did not acknowledge the control for possible confounding factors and rarely stressed the need for caution in interpreting their results. Cross-sectional studies do not allow inferring a cause-and-effect relationship between dentofacial features and dental trauma.

Perception of malocclusion and school performance in adolescents: a systematic review

Abstract This study aimed to assess the potential association between perception malocclusion and school performance in children and adolescents. An electronic search was performed in ten databases. Based on the PECO acronym (Population, Exposition, Comparator, and Outcome), the eligibility criteria included observational studies that compared the school performance of children and adolescents with and without the perception of malocclusion. There were no restrictions on the language or year of publication. Two reviewers selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias by using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for cross-sectional studies. School performance was measured by analyzing student grades; levels of absenteeism; and child or adolescent self-perception and/or the perception of parents, guardians, close friends, and teachers regarding the impact of malocclusion on school performance. The data were described narratively/descriptively. The search resulted in 3,581 registers, of which eight were included in the qualitative synthesis. These studies were published between 2007 and 2021. Two studies concluded that there was no significant association between school performance and perception of malocclusion, five studies found that only some of the children with malocclusion had their school performance affected, and one study concluded that there was a significant association between perception of malocclusion and low school performance. Considering all variables and the very low certainty of evidence, the perception of malocclusion seems to negatively impact school performance when associated with external and subjective factors. Further studies using additional measurement standards are required.

Comparison of gingival display in smile attractiveness among restorative dentists, orthodontists, prosthodontists, periodontists, and laypeople.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Multidisciplinary treatment needs a common goal, and dentists should understand the esthetic perception of laypeople and the other specialists involved. Such information is sparse. PURPOSE: The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to compare the influence of gingival display on perceived smile esthetics among restorative dentists, orthodontists, prosthodontists, periodontists, and laypeople. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Photographs of the smiles of 2 volunteers (1 female and 1 male) were manipulated on a computer to produce gingival exposure of 1, 3, and 5 mm and central incisor coverage of 3 and 5 mm. The images were evaluated by using a 100-mm visual analog scale by 155 raters divided into 5 groups (restorative dentists, orthodontists, prosthodontists, periodontists, and laypeople). RESULTS: The dental specialists, mainly orthodontists and periodontists, were more sensitive about alterations in gingival display than the laypeople. For the female smile, higher mean scores were attributed to 1 mm of gingival exposure by all groups of raters. For the male smile, 3 mm of central incisor coverage received higher mean scores, except for the laypeople, who considered gingival display of 1 mm to be more attractive. For both smiles, 5 mm of gingival display was judged to be the least attractive. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the differences in opinion between dental specialists and laypeople and the acceptable variations in gingival display, the preferences of patients should be considered in the diagnosis and treatment decision-making process.