2005•Unpublished venueRequires access

Comparison of tooth size and arch dimensions between normal occlusion group and class I malocclusion group

Jalali Tahereh, M Pousti

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Recognizing the main coutributing factors of crowding has always been a matter of interest in orthodontics. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the extent of which tooth size or jaw dimension contribute to dental crowding. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, two groups of dental casts were selected on the basis of having or not having dental crowding. The first group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) which exhibited normal occlusion(without crowding). The second group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) with gross dental crowding and classI skeletal pattern. Mean values and standard deviations of the following parameters were used to compare the two groups: individual and collective mesiodistal tooth diameters, dental arch perimetres, dental arch lengths and buccal and lingual dental arch widths in canine and molar region. To compare the two groups, two tailed student-t test, with 95 confidence interval was used. Results: On the basis of our research crowded and noncrowded group had statistically significant differences in both mesiodistal tooth diameters and transverse arch dimensions. The crowded group was found to have smaller transverse maxillary dental arch dimensions but larger tooth diameters than in the normal occlusion group. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that consideration should be given to those treatment techniques which increase dental arch transverse width and also decrease tooth material by means of extraction or stripping.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Introduction: Recognizing the main coutributing factors of crowding has always been a matter of interest in orthodontics. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the extent of which tooth size or jaw dimension contribute to dental crowding. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, two groups of dental casts were selected on the basis of having or not having dental crowding. The first group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) which exhibited normal occlusion(without crowding). The second group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) with gross dental crowding and classI skeletal pattern. Mean values and standard deviations of the following parameters were used to compare the two groups: individual and collective mesiodistal tooth diameters, dental arch perimetres, dental arch lengths and buccal and lingual dental arch widths in canine and molar region. To compare the two groups, two tailed student-t test, with 95 confidence interval was used. Results: On the basis of our research crowded and noncrowded group had statistically significant differences in both mesiodistal tooth diameters and transverse arch dimensions. The crowded group was found to have smaller transverse maxillary dental arch dimensions but larger tooth diameters than in the normal occlusion group. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that consideration should be given to those treatment techniques which increase dental arch transverse width and also decrease tooth material by means of extraction or stripping.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Introduction: Recognizing the main coutributing factors of crowding has always been a matter of interest in orthodontics. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the extent of which tooth size or jaw dimension contribute to dental crowding. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, two groups of dental casts were selected on the basis of having or not having dental crowding. The first group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) which exhibited normal occlusion(without crowding). The second group consisted of 30 pairs of dental casts (15 male and 15 female) with gross dental crowding and classI skeletal pattern. Mean values and standard deviations of the following parameters were used to compare the two groups: individual and collective mesiodistal tooth diameters, dental arch perimetres, dental arch lengths and buccal and lingual dental arch widths in canine and molar region. To compare the two groups, two tailed student-t test, with 95 confidence interval was used. Results: On the basis of our research crowded and noncrowded group had statistically significant differences in both mesiodistal tooth diameters and transverse arch dimensions. The crowded group was found to have smaller transverse maxillary dental arch dimensions but larger tooth diameters than in the normal occlusion group. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that consideration should be given to those treatment techniques which increase dental arch transverse width and also decrease tooth material by means of extraction or stripping.

Key concepts: Crowding, Dental arch, Molar, Occlusion, Dentistry, Arch, Orthodontics, Malocclusion

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of tooth size and arch dimensions between normal occlusion group and class I malocclusion group — Research Paper | ScholarLens