Comparing the Salzmann Index to automatic qualifying conditions when selecting medically necessary orthodontic patients

INTRODUCTION

This study compared the Salzmann Index (SI) to the American Association of Orthodontists-proposed Automatic Qualifying Conditions (AQC) list in determining eligibility for medically necessary orthodontic care (MNOC). In Pennsylvania, The SI must reflect a score of ≥25, whereas the AQCs are considered binary indicators of a treatment need-the presence of any AQC qualifies a patient for treatment under Medicaid. This study was designed to determine whether the same patients are selected as eligible for MNOC regardless of which selection method is used.

METHODS

The orthodontic records of 139 participants aged 10-17 years were used to calculate SI scores and identify any AQCs present. McNemar's test of agreement was used to compare patients selected for treatment needs on the basis of SI to those selected on the basis of the presence of an AQC.

RESULTS

The mean SI score was 14.7. Twelve patients (8.6%) were selected for treatment needs because of an SI of ≥25, whereas 44 patients (31.7%) were deemed to have at least 1 AQC present. Of the 44 patients with AQCs, only 11 had SI scores of ≥25. McNemar's test of agreement found that SI score and AQC presence did not select patients similarly (P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The SI and AQCs do not appear to select the same patients for MNOC, suggesting that replacing the SI with a list of AQCs would significantly impact which patients are selected for Medicaid-funded orthodontic care in Pennsylvania.

The Salzmann Index and discrepancy index correlation: Determining a threshold discrepancy index score for Medicaid approval

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare patients' Salzmann Index scores for those who applied for Medicaid orthodontic coverage in Pennsylvania with their corresponding American Board of Orthodontics discrepancy index (DI) scores to assess if there is a correlation between Salzmann and DI scores. In addition, a threshold DI score was calculated that would correspond to Medicaid coverage approval. The study intended to answer the following questions: is there a correlation of 0.7 or greater between a patient's Salzmann Index and their DI? If so, is there a particular DI score that can be used as the minimum score for approving Medicaid orthodontic coverage in the state of Pennsylvania?

METHODS

Salzmann Index scores, DI scores, and approval and disapproval results for Medicaid orthodontic coverage were obtained from 104 subjects aged between 10 and 17 years. A linear regression model was generated to assess if there was a correlation between the Salzmann scores and DI scores. If a correlation coefficient of 0.7 or greater were found, a threshold Salzmann Index score would be determined for subjects who were approved for Medicaid orthodontic coverage. The threshold Salzmann score would be used in the linear regression formula to find the corresponding DI score, which would be designated as the threshold DI score for approval for Medicaid orthodontic coverage in the state of Pennsylvania.

RESULTS

A Pearson correlation of 0.453 was calculated between the 104 Salzmann scores and DI scores, demonstrating a moderate correlation. With the correlation coefficient being lower than 0.7, binary logistic regressions were calculated to assess the predictability between a given Salzmann score and approval and disapproval for Medicaid orthodontic coverage. The Salzmann score had an overall 68.3% success in predicting Medicaid orthodontic coverage approval/disapproval. Of the 58 subjects that were approved for Medicaid orthodontic coverage, 46.6% had Salzmann scores equal to or greater than 25. Of the 46 subjects that were disapproved for Medicaid orthodontic coverage, 78.3% had Salzmann scores equal to or less than 24.

CONCLUSIONS

With the lack of high prediction rates seen from the results of the regression models, the current system of Medicaid does not appear to show consistency for assessing the need for orthodontic treatment coverage. Multiple insurance companies that participate under Medicaid require a Salzmann score of 25 or greater for approval; however, the results show the Salzmann score is arbitrary in terms of approval and disapproval. There appear to be underlying factors apart from the Salzmann score that the Pennsylvania Medicaid system uses to justify whether a patient was approved or denied for coverage.

Influence of upper lip curvature on smile attractiveness in patients with different degrees of gingival smiles: A cross-sectional study with opinions from oral health providers and laypersons

INTRODUCTION

Although there is relative consensus about approaches to gingival smile management, there are still discrepancies as to whether a gingival smile is attractive or not. The purpose of this study was to quantify the influence of upper lip curvature shape and the amount of gingival display on the perception of smile attractiveness assessed by Peruvian orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons.

METHODS

A frontal photograph was digitally altered to generate 3 types of upper lip curvature shapes (upward, straight, and downward) with 5 different levels of gingival smile exposure (0 mm, 2 mm, 3 mm, 4 mm, and 5 mm). Fifteen images were generated. Three groups of evaluators (50 dentists, 50 orthodontists, and 50 laypersons) assessed the images using a visual analog scale. One-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni post-hoc tests and multiple linear regressions were applied.

RESULTS

The downward lip curvature shape had a negative effect on the esthetic evaluation of the smile with gingival exposures of 3 mm or more for all the evaluating groups (approximately 20-30 points less than upward or straight smile curvature shapes, P <0.05). Laypeople gave higher scores of almost 10 points more than dentists and orthodontists when evaluating the upward lip curvature shape with 5 mm of gingival exposure during smile (P = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that upward or straight upper lip curvature shapes have a positive impact on perceived smile esthetics. In contrast, downward upper lip curvature shapes have a negative effect on perception when evaluating different degrees of gingival smiles.

Influence of maxillary lateral incisor width ratio on perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the impact of different maxillary lateral incisor width ratios on the perception of smile esthetics among orthodontists and laypersons.

METHODS

A smile photograph of a male subject showing the lips and gingival margins was selected. The smile was standardized for maxillary central incisor width proportions and ideally perceived smile esthetics. The maxillary lateral incisor width was symmetrically modified in increments of ratios of the central incisor from a ratio of 4:10 to a ratio of 8:10. The images were analyzed by 283 laypersons and 83 orthodontists who ranked the level of attractiveness using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

There were significant differences between the esthetic perception of the five different width ratios, and between the orthodontists and laypersons in their evaluations of esthetics (P < 0.0004). There were no significant differences in esthetic evaluations between genders.

CONCLUSIONS

For orthodontists, the most attractive width ratio was 5.7:10, while the highest ranked ratio among laypersons was 8:10, although laypersons ranked all ratios very similarly. Both groups ranked the width ratio of 4:10 the lowest. Orthodontists were more critical in their assessment of esthetics.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

To what proportions or protocol should a peg-shaped maxillary lateral incisor or missing lateral, that is, to be replaced with an implant/crown be restored? This is an important clinical question that is often encountered by the orthodontist and the restoring dentist. The literature suggests that orthodontists and laypeople have different perceptions of smile esthetics, and it is important to have patient centered goals when treatment planning. Further research is necessary to identify the width ratio of which the lateral incisor is perceived to be esthetic as well as the ideal ratio to consider when restoring lateral incisors. This research assessed and compared the perception that orthodontists and laypeople have on smile esthetics regarding different width ratios of lateral incisors.

Comparing the plaque-removal ability of a triple-headed toothbrush versus a conventional manual toothbrush in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances: A single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this trial was to compare the plaque removal ability of a triple-headed toothbrush to a conventional manual toothbrush in adolescents with fixed orthodontic appliances.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty adolescent patients undergoing orthodontic treatment were randomly assigned to brush one time with either a conventional manual toothbrush or a triple-headed toothbrush. The main outcome was the post-brushing plaque index as measured by the Silness-Löe plaque index.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (mean age, 14.2; standard deviation, 1.65) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either a manual toothbrush group or a triple-headed toothbrush group. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. There were no dropouts. The mean post-brushing plaque index was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.67-1.02; SD, 0.60) for the conventional manual toothbrush group, and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.13-0.49; SD, 0.48) for the triple-headed toothbrush group. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean plaque index of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.28-0.78; P<0.001) between the two groups after brushing. No harms were observed.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicate strong evidence that the triple-headed toothbrush leads to a significantly lower plaque index compared to the conventional manual toothbrush post-brushing.

Long-term dental and skeletal effects of mandibular advancement devices in adults with obstructive sleep apnoea: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to clarify whether there are any significant long-term sequelae to wearing mandibular advancement devices focusing on dental and skeletal effects in adults with OSA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Databases, including PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and SAGE Journals. Hand searches and grey literature were also used. A piloted data collection form was used to extract the appropriate data.

RESULTS

Twenty-three reports of 19 studies were included. Five had serious risk of bias while 18 had moderate risk of bias. Meta-analysis revealed a significant change in overbite and overjet. I-squared analysis showed a high level of statistical heterogeneity. A moderate correlation was found between wear time and amount of change.

CONCLUSION

Mandibular advancement devices will cause a small but statistically significant change in the dentition of long-term wearers. Skeletal changes are generally secondary to dental changes.

The trend toward increased use of statistics in published orthodontic articles

There has been an almost twofold increase in the use of statistical procedures in the articles appearing in the American Journal of Orthodontics from 1975 to 1985. That increase is due primarily to the increase in articles using inferential statistics. This trend toward increased use and complexity of statistical procedures in published orthodontic articles suggests a need for orthodontists to be fully familiar with statistical procedures.

Assessment of buccal separators in the relief of bruxist activity associated with myofascial pain-dysfunction

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of heavy (S2) Alastik separators in relieving bruxist activity as monitored through masseter muscle area EMG activity, muscle palpation, and self-reporting in 21 Caucasian subjects. The subjects, all of whom suffered from both bruxism and myofascial pain-dysfunction, were randomly assigned to one of three groups: experimental (separator group); placebo (separator placed and removed); and control groups (no separator). The findings from this study indicate that there were no observable differences in either subjective or objective responses to the pretreatment versus posttreatment questionnaire and clinical examination for tooth clenching or grinding, facial pain, and fatigue of the jaws. In addition, no statistical differences were found between pre and posttreatment data. The EMG data did not show any statistical differences between pretreatment and posttreatment evaluations or among the 3 groups.