JOHCD-Adult Orthodontics Versus Adolescent Orthodontics
JOHCD-Adult Orthodontics Versus Adolescent Orthodontics
JOHCD-Adult Orthodontics Versus Adolescent Orthodontics
42
ABSTRACT
The scope of orthodontics has widened to include not only children and adolescents but also adults, thereby abolishing the upper age limit. With growing esthetic conscience among the society, a great number of young adults are seeking orthodontic treatment primarily for esthetic reasons. They undergo comprehensive orthodontic treatment involving major occlusal changes to get the utmost esthetically pleasing face. The older adults with poor dental conditions requiring perio-restorative treatment undergo adjunctive orthodontic treatment to attain a long-term prognosis. The orthodontist faces challenges to practice adult orthodontics due to various issues being under considerations, which are quite different than routine orthodontic treatment oriented to children and adolescents. This article highlights the difficulties and limitations faced by the orthodontist while practicing adult orthodontics with remedies to overcome them.
KEY WORDS
Adult Orthodontics.
Contact Author
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
INTRODUCTION
here is a rising influx of adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment in the recent era. 20-25% of orthodontic patients are reported to be adults and this trend is likely to rise by leaps and bounds in the near future in view of society becoming more esthetic and health conscious. Hence, it is imperative to explore and understand various aspects of orthodontic treatment where adults need special considerations in contrast to adolescents. Adult orthodontics is basically same as adolescent orthodontics for tissue changes associated with tooth movement, stages of treatment and goal of treatment. But there are certain differences in several aspects namely psychosocial, biological and mechanical aspects where adults need special consideration for behavioral and clinical management (1). Adult patients require different treatment approach from adolescents.
instructions from orthodontists such as elastic wear, hygiene maintenance, keeping their appointments etc but they dont commit to long-term treatment (3). In other words, adults demand best treatment results in a short time. Therefore, it is quite important to apprise these patients about the limitations & complexity of the treatment, increased treatment time & high relapse potential. Adult patients may have hesitation in accepting visibility of orthodontic appliances. They may demand esthetic appliance e.g. esthetic brackets, lingual appliance, invisalign etc irrespective of their limitations (3). Perio-restorative problems and age related issues These issues need special considerations in adult orthodontics.
ISSUES TO BE CONSIDERED
Various factors must be given considerations, which demand special consideration for adults. Psychosocial factors Perio-restorative problems Age related considerations Lack of growth potential Aging of tissues Vulnerability to Root resorption Vulnerability to TMD To take care of these important issues, adult orthodontics often requires interdisciplinary approach to deliver efficient treatment outcome involving many healthcare providers viz. Periodontist, Restorative Dentist, Prosthodontist, Endodontist, TMJ specialist, Oral & Maxillofacial Surgeon etc (2). Psychosocial factors It is important to understand expectations and attitude of adult patients in order to plan behavioral management before clinical management. Adult patients have high treatment expectations. They are more inquisitive about the detail of the treatment as treatment time, complexity of treatment, number of visits, likelihood of correction etc. They have been shown to have more discomfort from appliances. They are more co-operative in following the
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
43
increase biological width and provide better support at the margin of the prosthesis); To restore functional occlusion keeping in mind existing skeletal relationship rather than aiming for Andrews six keys to normal occlusion; Achieving better lip support for flaccid & long upper lip by maintaining anterior teeth in slight procumbent position with correction of overjet by proclining & maintaining lower incisors in more procumbent position than normal position to avert wrinkles around the lips Restoring vertical dimension with bite plate before placing prosthesis in bite collapse and tooth mobility.
periodontal disease, it is better to move teeth away to restore it with prosthesis since normal bone formation may not occur if tooth is moved into the defect (7). Existing occlusion is maintained when occlusal difficulties are not present. Lower incisor extraction is preferred over bicuspid extraction to relieve crowding. Proximal stripping (as 3 cornered spaces are more prevalent) and occlusal equilibration are frequently done procedures (3).
BIOMECHANICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Adult bone is less reactive to mechanical forces (10). There is a greater risk of loss of attachment as well as marginal bone loss with mild gingival infections as compared to adolescents (11). Marginal bone loss and gingival recession are commonly present in adults (12). Affected occlusal function may show disuse dystrophy in their supporting bone (13). Loss of attachment leads to apical shift of centre of resistance thereby increasing distance from centre of resistance to point of force application in turn leading to increased tipping moment produced by the given force. Therefore greater countervailing moment is required to balance this greater tipping moment to translate periodontally compromised tooth (7, 14). Forces between active & reactive units are balanced considering the number of teeth to be moved, anchorage available & direction/amount of movement. Same force produces greater pressure in periodontally compromised tooth than that in a healthy tooth due to reduced periodontal tissue. Hence, the absolute magnitude
44
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
of force should be reduced also due to other reasons such as delayed response (due to reduced cellular activity in adults) and risk of root resorption (due to dense cortical bone and decreased periodontal width) (14-17). Considerations Regarding Tooth Movements To correct deep bite in young patients, posterior extrusion is allowed because of compensation made by vertical growth. But overbite correction in adults should be carried out by intrusion of anterior teeth, not by extrusion of posterior teeth (1, 5, 7). This is because posterior extrusion would encroach in the freeway space due to lack of vertical growth stressing the TMJ muscles and result in downward and backward movement of the mandible, which thereby tend to relapse due to instability. If individual tooth extrusion is required to level the associated vertical bone defect, the tooth should be occlusally equilibrated (4). Palatal expansion is carefully done to avoid buccal tipping due to extrusion associated with it. Intrusion leads to deepening of periodontal pockets in periodontally involved patients. It has been observed that in healthy patients, periodontal probing depth does not increase rather improves gingival position forming a tight epithelial cuff. Therefore intrusion should never be attempted without control of inflammation (7). Most mechanotherapy has extr usive component. Retraction force has a larger extrusive force component if the marginal bone loss is most pronounced. Hence, light continuous intrusive force should be maintained during retraction (7). In adult patients segmented arch mechanics (a stable anchor unit by several teeth rigidly connected to create functional equivalent of a single large multirooted anchor tooth) is preferred for intrusion. Light force is required for adults with periodontally compromised status due to less periodontal area for force distribution. Mechanotherapy for intrusion is same for adults & adolescents. Burstone type depressing arches Ricketts utility arches
Both have long span from stabilized posterior segments to anterior area but Burstone type depressing arches are preferred in adults due to more flexibility and thereby delivering light force (7). Considerations Regarding Anchorage Anchorage may be affected by poor periorestorative status and missing teeth (18). Headgears may not be acceptable to an adult due to esthetic reasons. Hence intraoral anchorage devices such as posterior stabilizing segments (using lingual arches and buccal stabilizing wires) and controlled forces are used. Two step space closure with frictionless mechanics can be used to reduce strain on anchorage (frequent appointments may be needed for the control of cuspid retraction) (7). Microimplants can also be used to avoid dependence on teeth for anchorage (19).
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
45
required due to reduced cellular activity along with increase in lag time for tissue remodelling in adult patients (3, 10). Periodontally compromised patients may need permanent retention (26, 27). Traditional orthodontic retainer (to allow each tooth to move independently) is not indicated in adults with significant periodontal bone loss & mobile teeth. Splinting may be required either short term being occlusal splint, wraparound retainer, a suckdown plastic wafer or long term using cast restorations (7).
CONCLUSION
An individualized appropriate treatment plan needs to be formulated for an adult patient on the basis of careful evaluation of a complex interaction of various biological, psychosocial and mechanical factors.
REFERENCES
1. Vanarsdall RL, Musich DR. Adult orthodontics: Diagnosis and treatment. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL (eds). Orthodontics: Current principles and techniques. 4th edition, St Louis: Mosby, 2005: 937-992. 2. Kalia S, Melsen B. Interdisciplinary approaches to adult orthodontic care. J Orthod 2001; 28(3): 191-196. 3. Sheridan JJ. The readers corner. J Clin Orthod 2005; 39(4): 219223. 4. Kokich V. The role of orthodontics as an adjunct to periodontal therapy, In: Newman MG, Takei HH, Carranza FA, eds. Clinical periodontology, 9th edn, Philadelphia, WB Saunders Co. 2002:704718. 5. Bishara SE: Textbook of orthodontics. WB Saunders Co. 2001: 494-531. 6. Hom BM, Turley PK. Effects of space closure of the mandibular first molar area in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1984; 105: 25-34. 7. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 4th Ed, St Louis, Mosby. 2007: 635-685. 8. Zachrisson BU, Buyukyilmaz T. Recent advances in bonding to gold, amalgam and porcelain. J Clin Orthod 1993; 27: 661-675. 9. Forsberg CM, Brattstrom V, Malmberg E, Nord CE. Ligature wires and elastomeric rings: two methods of ligation and their association with microbial colonization of Streptococcus mutans and Lactobacilli. Eur J Orthod 1991; 13: 416-420. 10. Melsen B. Limitations in adult orthodontics. In: Melsen B (ed). Current controversies in orthodontics. Quintessence Publishing Co. 1991: 147-180. 11. Boyd RL, Leggott PQ, Quinn RS, et al. Periodontal implications of orthodontic treatment in adults with reduced or normal periodontal tissues versus those of adolescents. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 96: 191-198. 12. Shei O, Waerhaug J, Lovdal A, Arnulf A. Alveolar bone loss as related to oral hygiene and age. J Periodontol 1959; 26: 7-16.
46
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
13. Picton DCA. The effect of external forces on the periodontium. In: AH Melcher, WH Bowen (eds) Biology of the periodontium. New York, Academic Press, 1969: 363419 14. Williams S, Melsen B, Agerbaek N, Asboe V. The orthodontic treatment of malocclusion in patients with previous periodontal disease. Br J Orthod 1982; 9: 178-184. 15. Reitan K. Effects of force magnitude and direction of tooth movement on different alveolar bone types. Angle Orthod 1964; 34(4): 244-255. 16. Reitan K. Initial tissue behavior during apical root resorption. Angle Orthod 1974; 44: 68-82. 17. Mirabella AD, Artun J. Risk factors for apical root resorption of maxillary anterior teeth in adult orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995; 108: 4855. 18. Ong MA, Wang HL, Smith FN. Interrelationships between periodontics and adult orthodontics. J Clin Periodontol 1998; 25: 271-277. 19. Bryant SR, Zarb GA. Osseointegration of oral implants in older and younger adults. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1998; 13: 492-499.
20. Malmgren O, Levander E. Minimizing orthodontically induced root resorption. In Graber TM, Eliades T, Athanasiou AE (eds). Risk management in orthodontics: Experts guide to malpractice. Quintessence Publishing Co. 2004: 6174. 21. McNamara JA, Seligman DA, Okeson JP. Occlusion, orthodontic treatment and temporomandibular disorders: a review. J Orofacial Pain 1995; 9: 73-90. 22. Bond JA. The child versus the adult. Dent Clin North Am 1972; 16: 401-412. 23. Reitan K. Tissue reaction as related to the age factor. Dental record. 1954; 74: 271279. 24. Norton LA. The effect of aging cellular mechanisms on tooth movement. Dent Clin North Am 1988; 32: 437-446. 25. Dyer GS, Harris EF, Vaden JL. Age effects on orthodontic treatment: adolescents contrasted with adults. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1991; 100: 523-530. 26. Harris EF, Vaden JL, Dunn KL. Effects of patient age on post orthodontic stability in Class II, division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994; 105: 2534. 27. Kahl-Nieke B. Retention and stability considerations for adult patients. Dent Clin North Am 1996; 40: 961-994.
THE AUTHOR
Dr. Dinesh K. Bagga
Professor and Head Deptt. of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthodpaedics, I.T.S. Centre for Dental Studies and Research, Murad Nagar, Ghaziabad (UP) Phone no. 09868071583 E mail: drdkbagga2000@yahoo.co.in
JOHCD
www.johcd.org
May 2010;4(2)
47