Statistical Study Concerning Extraction and Non-Extraction Methods in Orthodontic Treatments.

Abstract

Introduction: The need to extract permanent teeth for the correction of dento-maxillary anomalies remains even today a controversy in orthodontic therapy. The purpose of this study was to assess the orthodontist's point of view on the extraction and non-extraction methods used in orthodontic treatments, regarding clinical experience.

Material and methods: A de novo conceived questionnaire was elaborated by means of Google Forms and it comprised 22 questions regarding gender, age, different proprieties and aspects of both extraction and non-extraction methods and the percentage of treated patients who developed an increase in dental sensitivity and caries activity following the therapeutic stripping procedure.

Results: 204 orthodontists answered the questionnaire. The respondents chose dental stripping (IPR-interproximal reduction) as the most used non-extraction method in their orthodontic practice with 34,3%, followed by over-expansion and dental stripping 24%. The probability that females will try to avoid dental extractions is 1.888 times higher compared to males. The association is statistically significant (p-value 0.0336). 70,1% of clinicians state that they use dental stripping as a non-extraction method to gain space even when there is NO Bolton discrepancy. In Class III cases, for reducing crowding and correcting the dental relations, 65.2% of doctors opt for dental stripping, while 34.8% do not avoid the extraction of a lower incisor.

Conclusions: Among the non-extraction methods for creating space, the most used by the surveyed orthodontists was dental stripping IPR. Tooth extraction remains a solution used by orthodontists for treating dentomaxillary disharmonies with crowding.