Correlation between body mass index and orthodontic treatment outcome

To determine whether there is a correlation between body mass index (BMI), patient cooperation, and treatment success during multibracket (MB) appliance therapy. All adolescent MB patients started and finished between 2007 and 2010 were analyzed. The pretreatment BMI was calculated and negative file...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe Angle orthodontist Vol. 83; no. 3; pp. 371 - 375
Main Authors von Bremen, J, Wagner, J, Ruf, S
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Edward H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc 01.05.2013
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:To determine whether there is a correlation between body mass index (BMI), patient cooperation, and treatment success during multibracket (MB) appliance therapy. All adolescent MB patients started and finished between 2007 and 2010 were analyzed. The pretreatment BMI was calculated and negative file entries such as bad oral hygiene, missed appointments, and appliance breakage were recorded. According to the number of negative entries, cooperation was classified as good, bad, or poor. Additionally, the treatment duration and the number of appointments were recorded. For the evaluation of treatment success, the pretreatment and posttreatment PAR (peer assessment rating) scores were measured. Of the 77 subjects, 61 had a normal BMI (79.2%) and 16 were considered overweight (20.8%). Whereas 51.7% of the normal-weight children had a good cooperation, only 25% of the overweight patients cooperated sufficiently. Consequently, the number of patients exhibiting bad or poor cooperation was higher in the overweight group (37.5% bad, 37.5% poor) than in the normal-weight group (30.6% bad, 17.7% poor). Patients with an increased BMI had a slightly longer treatment duration (21.4 months) and needed more appointments (19.9) than their normal-weight peers (18.9 months, 18.1 appointments). The PAR (peer assessment rating) score reduction, however, was comparable (normal BMI: 17.8 points, 64.0%; increased BMI: 15.2 points, 65.3%). In the present study, children with increased BMI did not cooperate as well during MB therapy as their normal-weight peers, but the treatment outcome was comparable in the two groups.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0003-3219
1945-7103
DOI:10.2319/070612-555.1