Korean J Orthod.  2011 Jun;41(3):154-163. 10.4041/kjod.2011.41.3.154.

Quantitative evaluation and affecting factors of post-treatment relapse tendency

• Son WS
• Cha KS
• Chung DH
• Kim TW

• KMID: 1975427
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2011.41.3.154

Abstract

OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to quantitatively evaluate relapse tendency after orthodontic treatment and determine the contributing factors by using the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system (ABO-OGS).
METHODS
The subjects were 80 patients with more than 2 years of retention period after completing orthodontic treatment at the dental hospitals of Busan University, Kyunghee University, and Dankook University. The posttreatment (T2) and post-retention (T3) ABO-OGS measurements were analyzed in relation to age, gender, Angle's classification, extraction, retention period, and pretreatment condition (initial peer assessment rating (PAR) index, T1) by multiple regression analysis.
RESULTS
Among the 7 ABO-OGS criteria, alignment worsened but occlusal contact and interproximal contact improved in T3, but not in T2 (p < 0.01). The 4 other criteria showed no significant differences. Multiple regression analysis showed that alignment, occlusal relationship, overjet, and interproximal contact were significant linear models, but with a low explanation power. Age, gender, Angle's classification, extraction, retention period, and pretreatment condition (initial PAR index, T1) had little influence on the ABO-OGS changes between T3 and T2.
CONCLUSIONS
An orthodontist's understanding of post-treatment relapse tendency can be useful in diagnosis and during patient consultation.

Keyword

Relapse; PAR index; ABO-OGS; Occlusal index

MeSH Terms

Evaluation Studies as Topic
Humans
Linear Models
Malocclusion
Orthodontics
Recurrence
Retention (Psychology)

Reference

1. Hellman M. Fundamental principles and expedient compromises in orthodontic procedures. Transactions of the American Association of Orthodontists. 1945. St. Louis: Mosby;46.

2. Uhde MD, Sadowsky C, BeGole EA. Long-term stability of dental relationships after orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1983. 53:240–252.

3. Erdinc AE, Nanda RS, Işiksal E. Relapse of anterior crowding in patients treated with extraction and nonextraction of premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006. 129:775–784.

4. Carmen RB. A study of mandibular anterior crowding in untreated cases and its predictability. Am J Orthod. 1980. 77:346–347.

5. Little RM, Wallen TR, Riedel RA. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior alignment-first premolar extraction cases treated by traditional edgewise orthodontics. Am J Orthod. 1981. 80:349–365.

6. Rossouw PE, Preston CB, Lombard C. A longitudinal evaluation of extraction versus nonextraction treatment with special reference to the posttreatment irregularity of the lower incisors. Semin Orthod. 1999. 5:160–170.

7. Little RM. The irregularity index: a quantitative score of mandibular anterior alignment. Am J Orthod. 1975. 68:554–563.

8. Richmond S, Shaw WC, O'Brien KD, Buchanan IB, Jones R, Stephens CD, et al. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod. 1992. 14:125–139.

9. Casko JS, Vaden JL, Kokich VG, Damone J, James RD, Cangialosi TJ, et al. American Board of Orthodontics. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998. 114:589–599.

10. Ludwig MK. An analysis of anterior overbite relationship changes during and following orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1966. 36:204–210.

11. Al Yami EA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, van't Hof MA. Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome: follow-up until 10 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999. 115:300–304.

12. Otuyemi OD, Jones SP. Long-term evaluation of treated class II division 1 malocclusions utilizing the PAR index. Br J Orthod. 1995. 22:171–178.

13. Deguchi T, Honjo T, Fukunaga T, Miyawaki S, Roberts WE, Takano-Yamamoto T. Clinical assessment of orthodontic outcomes with the peer assessment rating, discrepancy index, objective grading system, and comprehensive clinical assessment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005. 127:434–443.

14. Shah AA. Postretention changes in mandibular crowding: a review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003. 124:298–308.

15. Sauget E, Covell DA Jr, Boero RP, Lieber WS. Comparison of occlusal contacts with use of Hawley and clear overlay retainers. Angle Orthod. 1997. 67:223–230.

16. Morton S, Pancherz H. Changes in functional occlusion during the postorthodontic retention period: a prospective longitudinal clinical study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009. 135:310–315.

17. Ormiston JP, Huang GJ, Little RM, Decker JD, Seuk GD. Retrospective analysis of long-term stable and unstable orthodontic treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005. 128:568–574.

18. Birkeland K, Furevik J, Bøe OE, Wisth PJ. Evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes by the PAR Index. Eur J Orthod. 1997. 19:279–288.

19. Kim HH, Lee KH, Kim JC. The treatment change of PAR (peer assessment rating) index and cephalometric measurements in Class I malocclusion patients. Korean J Orthod. 1999. 29:277–284.

20. de Freitas KM, Janson G, de Freitas MR, Pinzan A, Henriques JF, Pinzan-Vercelino CR. Influence of the quality of the finished occlusion on postretention occlusal relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007. 132:428.e9–428.e14.

21. Nett BC, Huang GJ. Long-term posttreatment changes measured by the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005. 127:444–450.

22. Driscoll-Gilliland J, Buschang PH, Behrents RG. An evaluation of growth and stability in untreated and treated subjects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001. 120:588–597.

23. Schudy GF. Posttreatment craniofacial growth: Its implications in orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 1974. 65:39–57.

24. Vaden JL, Harris EF, Gardner RL. Relapse revisited. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997. 111:543–553.

25. Little RM, Riedel RA, Artun J. An evaluation of changes in mandibular anterior alignment from 10 to 20 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988. 93:423–428.