Journals / Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research) / 2006 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 4

Türk opulasyonunda sınıf II divizyon 1 maloklüzyon ve normal okluzyonlu bireylerde interark diş boyutu ilişkileri

Interarch tooth-size relationships of normal occlusion and class II division 1 malocclusion patients in a Turkish population

Pages
25–32
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Significant differences were found only in overall ratio among the normal occlusion and Class II, division 1 malocclusion groups (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: Several studies were published describing the importance of a correct tooth size proportion between the arches.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Subjects and Methods: This study consisted of 125 subjects with normal occlusion and 71 patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Significant differences were found only in overall ratio among the normal occlusion and Class II, division 1 malocclusion groups (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Introduction: Several studies were published describing the importance of a correct tooth size proportion between the arches. Objective: The aims of this study were to compare the tooth size ratios of a Turkish population to the Bolton ratios, determine sex differences in tooth-size ratios, identify the teeth that most affect the interarch relationship and determine whether there is a difference in intermaxillary tooth-size discrepancies for malocclusion subjects. Subjects and Methods: This study consisted of 125 subjects with normal occlusion and 71 patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion. For statistical evaluation, 2-way ANOVA, independent samples t-test and stepwise multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Results: Significant differences were found only in overall ratio among the normal occlusion and Class II, division 1 malocclusion groups (p

Özet

Giriş: Maksiller ve mandibuler dişler arasındaki diş boyut oranlarının önemi hakkında araştırmalar mevcuttur. Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Türk populasyonundaki diş boyut oranlarını Bolton oranlarıyla kıyaslamak, diş boyut oranlarındaki cinsiyet farklılıklarını belirlemek, interark diş ilişkilerini en çok etkileyen dişleri tanımlamak ve maloklüzyonlu bireylerde intermaksiller diş boyut uyumsuzluklarındaki farkları belirlemektir. Bireyler ve Yöntem: Çalışmamızda 125 normal okluzyonlu ve 71 Sınıf II, bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlu birey incelenmiştir. İstatistiksel değerlendirme 2- yönlü ANOVA, bağımsız gruplarda t-testi ve çoklu regresyon analizi kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Sadece normal oklüzyonlu ve Sınıf II, bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlu bireylerin tüm dişler oranlarında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmuştur (p

🔖

Cite This Article

SAĞLAM, B. A., AKSU, M., ÇİĞER, S. (2022). Türk opulasyonunda sınıf II divizyon 1 maloklüzyon ve normal okluzyonlu bireylerde interark diş boyutu ilişkileri. Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research), Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 4, 25–32. https://ajindex.com/articles/528479

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Howes AE. Case analysis and treatment planning based upon the relationship of the tooth material to its supporting bone. Am J Orthod. 1947;33:499-533
  2. Neff CW: Tailored occlusion with anterior coefficient. Am J Orthod. 1949;35:309-313
  3. Neff CW. The size relationship between the maxillary and mandibular anterior segments of the dental arch. Angle Orthod. 1957;27:138-147
  4. Bolton A. Disharmony in tooth size and its relation to the analysis and treatment of malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 1958;28:113-130
  5. Stifer J. A study of Pont’s, Howes’, Rees’, Neff’s, and Bolton’s analyses on Class I adult dentitions. Angle Orthod. 1958;28:215-225
  6. Smith SS, Buschang PH, Watanabe E. Interarch tooth size relationships of 3 populations:”Does Bolton’s analysis apply?”. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 117:169- 174
  7. Heusdens M, Dermaut L, Verbeeck R. The effect of tooth size discrepancy on occlusion: An experimental study: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117:184-191
  8. Sanin C, Savara BS. An analysis of permanent mesiodistal crown size. Am J Orthod. 1971;59:488-500
  9. Arya BS, Savara BS, Thomas D, Clarkson Q. Relation of sex and occlusion to mesiodistal tooth size. Am J Orthod. 1974;66:479-486
  10. Doris JM, Bernard BW, Kuftinec MM, Stom D. A biometric study of tooth size and dental crowding. Am J Orthod. 1981;79:326-336
  11. Lavelle CL. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. Am J Orthod. 1972;61: 29-37
  12. Richardson ER, Malhotra SK. Mesiodistal crown dimension of the permanent dentition of American Negroes. Am J Orthod. 1975;68:157-164
  13. Kene HJ. Mesiodistal crown diameters of permanent teeth in male American Negroes. Am J Orthod. 1979;76:95-99
  14. Merz ML, Isaacson RJ, Germane N, Rubenstein LK. Tooth diameters and arch perimeters in a black and a white population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;100:53- 58
  15. Santoro M, Ayoub ME, Rardi VA, Cangialosi TJ. Mesiodistal crown dimensions and tooth size discrepancy of permanent dentition of Dominican Americans. Angle Orthod. 2000;70:303-307
  16. Moorrees CFA, Thomsen SO, Jensen E, Yen PK. Mesiodistal crown diameter of the deciduous and permanent teeth in individuals. J Dent Res. 1957;36:39-47. Taken from Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117:169-174
  17. Lew KK, Keng SB. Anterior crown dimensions and relationships in an ethnic Chinese population with normal occlusions. Aust Orthod J. 1991; 12:105-109
  18. Ta TA, Ling JYK, Ha