Evaluation of Types of Treatment Plan for Patients with Class II Division 2 Malocclusion among Orthodontists in Puducherry and Tamil Nadu: A Questionnaire Study
Akash Ponnukumar, Arya Jayavarma, Lidhiya Alexander
Class II division 2, Management, Prevalence, Survey
Citation Information :
Ponnukumar A, Jayavarma A, Alexander L. Evaluation of Types of Treatment Plan for Patients with Class II Division 2 Malocclusion among Orthodontists in Puducherry and Tamil Nadu: A Questionnaire Study. 2022; 12 (1):11-14.
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the different treatment alternatives for class II division 2 malocclusion prevalent among the orthodontist in a questionnaire study. Methodology: The study was conducted among the orthodontist practicing in Chennai and Puducherry regions. A self-reviewed questionnaire was distributed to 52 orthodontists and the completely filled survey questions were collected and assessed. Results: Only an average of 27% of patients were having class II division 2 malocclusion with 69% of orthodontists considering the age of 12–15 years to be an optimal treatment period. Self-ligating bracket system was highly preferred for treatment care compared to the conventional bracket system. Conclusion: A need for proper treatment plan, appliance selection, and appropriate biomechanics is needed for class II division 2 malocclusion.
Chitra P, Negi G, Thushar BK, Verma S. Treatment outcomes in the sagittal and vertical dimensions with the AdvanSync2 class II corrector: A case series. J Contemp Orthod 2018;2(3):14–26. Corpus ID: 220598503.
Radha Krishna G, Saritha V, Suryaprakash VN. A study to determine the prevalence of malocclusion in primary dentition in suburban population in Chennai. Orthod Cyber J 2013;5:1–19. PMID: 30397375.
Uribe F and Nanda R. Treatment of class II, division 2 malocclusion in adults: Biomechanical considerations. J Clinic Orthodont 2003;37(11):599–606. PMID: 14652423.
Graber TM, Rakosi T, Petrovic AG. Dentofacial Orthopaedics with Functional Appliances. St. Louis: CV Mosby Co, 1997, pp. 346–352.
Roopa S, Rani MS. Questionnaire designing for a survey. J Ind Orthod Soc 2012;46(4):37–41. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10021-1104.
Nishimura M, Sannohe M, Nagasaka H, Igarashi K, Sugawara J. Nonextraction treatment with temporary skeletal anchorage devices to correct a Class II Division 2 malocclusion with excessive gingival display. Am J Orthodont Dentofac Orthoped 2014;145(1):85–94. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.06.022.
Nielsen IL. Class II, division 2 malocclusion: What the clinician should know about treatment of this malocclusion (part II). Taiwan J Orthodont 2021;33(2):1. DOI: 10.38209/2708-2636.1099.
Basavaraddi S, Gandedkar NH, Belludi A, Patil A. Correction of an adult class II division 2 individual using fixed functional appliance: A noncompliance approach. Contemp Clin Dent 2016;7(1):82–86. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.177114.
Atik E, Kocadereli I. Treatment of class II division 2 malocclusion using the forsus fatigue resistance device and 5-year follow-up. Case reports in dentistry 2016. DOI: 10.1155/2016/3168312.
Zreaqat M, Hassan R. Self-ligating brackets: An overview. In: Naretto S, editor, Principles in Contemporary Orthodontics, InTechOpen, 2011.