An investigation into the standard of orthodontic treatment carried out by GDPs after completion of a clinical assistant training.

A sample of 172 orthodontic patients treated by 10 general dental practitioners in their practices was assessed in terms of treatment need and standard of treatment provided. The practitioners had been clinical assistants, for a minimum of 2 years, at a District General Hospital before starting any of the cases. Prior to treatment 70% of the cases had a 'clear need' for treatment on dental health grounds and 73% of the cases had a 'moderate' or 'great need' for treatment on aesthetic grounds. Using the Peer Assessment Rating nomogram to assess the treatment standard, 83% of patients could be classed as 'improved' or 'greatly improved' with treatment but 17% were 'worse or no different'. The standard of treatment produced by fixed appliances was found to be superior to that produced by removable appliances alone. When removable appliances were used the best results were obtained when consultant advice was given. The results for the clinical assistant sample are compared with the results for the GDS sample published in 1993. Ways of further improving the treatment standards produced by the general dental practitioners are considered.

An evaluation of the views of general dental practitioners who have participated in an extended orthodontic training scheme.

A questionnaire was sent to 255 dental practitioners who had participated in an extended orthodontic training scheme, incorporating formal teaching and supervised clinical sessions over a period of not less than 24 months. The response of the practitioners was good; 78 per cent of the forms returned were suitable for analysis. Overall, the practitioners responded favourably to the schemes and felt that they had been of benefit to their clinical practice. The majority undertook more orthodontic treatment as a result and on average, fixed appliances were used in half of these treatments.

A safety adaptation to Interlandi headgear.

Extra-oral traction (E.O.T.) to a facebow is used with many types of removable, functional, and fixed orthodontic appliances. A versatile and popular method involves the elastic force being provided by an Interlandi headgear. The facebow, which is of necessity removable, can be displaced from its intra-oral attachments (whilst still connected to the headgear by the elastics) and may result in personal injury. This paper describes a suitable simply made device that can be incorporated to prevent facebow dislodgement, thereby improving safety.

Children's perceptions of their own malocclusions.

Recognition by a parent or child of an occlusal abnormality is one of the many factors which may influence a desire for orthodontic treatment. Non-orthodontists may not estimate the severity of malocclusion reliably and may use different criteria from orthodontists for the process. The present study therefore sought to examine the reliability of parents' and children's perceptions of the children's own malocclusions with rating scales under two anchoring conditions and to test the discrepancy between their estimates and those of a panel of orthodontists. The children's and parents' assessments had limited test-retest reliability but instead of making guesses about the severity of their malocclusions they consistently gave low estimates. These effects were not influenced by the additional anchoring stimuli.