On the Symposium: Consensus Conference Posture and Occlusion: Hypothesis of Correlation

• Published in: International journal of stomatology & occlusion medicine Vol. 2; no. 2; pp. 87 - 96
• Main Authors: Ciancaglini, R., Cerri, C., Saggini, R., Bellomo, R. G., Ridi, R., Pisciella, V., Di Pancrazio, L., Di Paolo, C., Leonardi, R., Greco, M., Heir, G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Vienna Springer Vienna 01.06.2009; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Committees; Conference Report; Dentistry; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Occlusion; Malocclusion; Body balance; Gait; Posture
• ISSN: 1867-2221; 1867-223X
• DOI: 10.1007/s12548-009-0016-x

Summary INTRODUCTION: A symposium was held in Milan, Italy, on November 28th, 2008: Posture and Occlusion : Hypothesis of correlation. An International Scientific Committee, produced a consensus document approved and subscribed by the scientific delegates of the SIDO, Società Italiana di Ortodonzia and SIMFER, Società Italiana di Medicina Fisica e Riabilitazione, the sponsors of the event. The previous consensus document, approved in a similar meeting in 1997 was acknowledged and regarded as valid and widely utilized in controversies (Medical and Legal, Insurances Companies, etc.) until now. PURPOSE: The goal of this meeting was an adjournment of that document with present state of the art evidence-based literature and experience. A thesis supporting a correlation between posture and occlusion was opposed to an oppositional position on the lack of a correlation (the pro and con positions). RESULTS: After thorough review of the current literature, the committee developed a new document (consensus). The committee noted that current literature is poor both for quality and for quantity on this topic; nevertheless, it was observed, that conservative treatment might have a beneficial role in the treatment of postural and occlusal disorders. However, because of the lack of evidence in favor of any definitive treatment or evidence-based therapies, treatment cannot be invasive and should be limited to only conservative and reversible modalities. CONCLUSIONS: It was recognized by the committee that conservative, non-invasive, and reversible treatment may be beneficial for some patients, and treatment is not contraindicated, but no treatment can be provided unless a working diagnosis is arrived before instituting a treatment plan. For this reason, the updated document of this 2008 Consensus Symposium exhibits a significant improvement for guiding the clinicians while compared with 1997 position in that it suggests that there may be a rationale for conservative treatment for certain, well-defined conditions. The definition of posture in the new document encompasses the neurophysiological basis of posture and gait, and emphasizes that posture is now regarded as controlled by a dynamic, multifaceted system.