the tweed profile - The Charles H. Tweed International Foundation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

tooth alignment. Long term stability of a malocclusion correction is an achievable goal. CONCLUSIONS The articles confirm some common findings. For mean changes in arch width from each study, refer to Table I and II. 1. In both extraction and non-extraction patients, mandibular intercanine width increases during treatment and decreases posttreatment. 2. Mandibular intermolar width changes are different between the extraction and non-extraction groups during treatment; the width decreases in the extraction group and increases in the nonextraction group. 3. Maxillary intercanine width increases during treatment in both the extraction and non-extraction cases. 4. 5. 6. Maxillary intermolar width changes differently between the extraction and non-extraction groups during treatment; the width decreases in the extraction group and increases in the nonextraction group. In various studies of non-extraction treatment with distal movement of one or both arches, overall long-term stability was achieved. According to the articles, proper mechanics is required and providing prolonged retention is suggested. When evaluating premolar extraction treatment, long-term stability turned out to be successfully achieved even after the significant decrease in arch width in the premolar and molar regions and the subsequent decrease in intercanine width posttreatment. The success is due to evidence based treatment objectives and the clinicians’ diagnostic and treatment ability. 23
REFERENCES 1. Joondeph DR. Retention and relapse. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL, editors. St Louis: Elsevier Mosby 2005; p.1123-51. 2. Riedel RA. A review of the retention problem. Angle Orthodo 1960;30:179-99. 3. Lundström AF. Malocclusions of the teeth regarded as a problem in connection with the apical base. Int J Orthod Oral Surg 1925;11:591-602. 4. Nance HN. Limitations of orthodontic treatment: diagnosis and treatment in the permanent dentition. Am J Orthod 1947;33:253-301. 5. McCauley CR. The cuspid and its function in retention. Am J Orthod 1944;30:196-205. 6. Strang RHW. The fallacy of denture expansion as a treatment procedure. Angle Orthod 1949;19:12-22. 7. Vaden JL. The Tweed-Merrifield philosophy. Semin Orthod 1996;2:237-40. 8. Vaden JL, Kiser HE. Straight talk about extraction and nonextraction: a differential diagnostic decision. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109:445-52. 9. Walter DC. Comparative changes in mandibular canine and first molar widths. Angle Orthod 1962;32:232-41. 10. Bishara SE, Bayati P, Zaher AR, Jakobsen JR. Comparisons of the dental arch changes in patients with Class II, civision 1 malocclusions: extraction vs non-extraction treatments. Angle Orthod 1994;64:351-8. 11. Gianelly AA. Arch width after extraction and non-extraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:25-8. 12. Sadowsky C, Schneider BJ, BeGole EA, Tahire E. Long term stability after orthodontic treatment: nonextraction with prolonged retention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;106:243-9. 13. Glenn G, Sinclair PM, Alexander RG. Nonextraction orthodontic therapy: Posttreatment dental and skeletal stability. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;92:321-8. 14. Elms TN, Buschang RH, Alexander RG. Long term stability of Class II division 1,non-extraction cervical facebow therapy: 1 Model analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109:271-6. 15. Boley JC, Mark JA, Sachdeva RCL, Buschchang PH. Long-term stability of Class I premolar extraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:277-87. 16. Vaden JL, Harris EF, Gardner RLZ. Relapse revisited. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:543-53. 17. Sondhi A, Cleall JF, BeGole EA. Dimensional changes in the dental arches of orthodontically treated cased. Am J Orthod 1980;77:60-74. 18. Peak JD. Cuspid stability. Am J Orthod 1956;42:608-14. 19. Bishara SE. Chadha JM, Potter RB. Stability of intercanine width, overbite and overjet correction. Am J Orthod 1973;63:588-95. 20. Gardner SC, Chaconas SJ. Post treatment and postretention changes following orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthodo 1976;46:151-61. 21. Dyer KC, Vaden JL, Edward FH. Relapse revisited-again. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:221-7. 24
Page 1 and 2: THE TWEED PROFILE PUBLISHED BY THE
Page 3: CONTENTS 2 ORTHODONTICS IN THE AGE
Page 6 and 7: FACIAL ESTHETICS - A VALID TREATMEN
Page 8 and 9: the final result. Communication wit
Page 10 and 11: VERTICAL CONTROL FOR THE CLASS II P
Page 12 and 13: The following records are those of
Page 14 and 15: This patient has crowding and is sl
Page 16 and 17: She was treated with Tweed-Merrifie
Page 18 and 19: This will Increase the Amount of In
Page 22 and 23: A .020 x .025 stainless steel T-loo
Page 24 and 25: for the other half (N=45) included
Page 28 and 29: RME ON PERMANENT VS RME ON DECIDUOU
Page 30 and 31: The “New REP” was retained for
Page 32 and 33: • Intercanine diameter: measured
Page 34 and 35: The second CBCT was repeated 10 mon
Page 36 and 37: 30. Ricketts RM, Roth RH, Chaconas
Page 38 and 39: DISCUSSION The described clinical a
Page 40 and 41: tion effect was created by the shif
Page 42 and 43: ceptable and favored by the Japanes
Page 45 and 46: CORRECTION OF ADULT SKELETAL CLASS
Page 47 and 48: applied for 10 to 12 hours a day an
Page 49 and 50: TREATMENT RESULT The patient was tr
Page 51 and 52: Cephalometrically, there was a good
Page 53 and 54: REFERENCES 1. Zachrisson B, Alnaes
Page 55 and 56: The panoramic X-ray (Fig 3) shows n
Page 57 and 58: Fig 15 Fig 18 Fig 16 Fig 19 SUMMARY
Page 59 and 60: the rather short anterior-posterior
Page 61: Figure16 correction which, in turn,

the tweed profile - The Charles H. Tweed International Foundation

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?