Search

The occupational stress associated with many professions, including general dentistry, has been well researched. An anonymous, self-administered, mail-out survey was distributed to Canadian orthodontists. The survey included 67 potential stressors, an overall occupational stress score, an overall job satisfaction scale, and items addressing various characteristics of the respondents. The response rate was 51.2% (335/654). Pronounced differences were found between the respondents in the evaluation of potential stressors and the overall occupational stress score. The category of stressors with the highest mean severity of stress scores was time-related stressors. The stressors with high mean severity scores and high mean frequency scores were as follows: falling behind schedule, trying to keep to a schedule, constant time pressures, patients with broken appliances, and motivating patients with poor OH and/or decalcification. Stepwise multiple regression determined a model, involving overall job satisfaction, age, participation in a study group, hours worked per week, part-time academics, days of continuing education per year, and participation in stress management, to account for 35.9% of the variation in overall occupational stress scores. The results indicate the importance of time-management skills in reducing occupational stress, but other factors seem to have more effect on reported occupational stress than do the characteristics addressed by this survey.

The purpose of this study was to examine diagnosis and treatment planning categorizations used by experienced orthodontists. Thirty-nine clinicians were asked to evaluate six test cases and formulate a diagnosis and treatment plan for each. The information provided was categorized using a problem-oriented classification. The results indicate little agreement exists in diagnostic subcategories, such as molar relationship, degree of crowding, or the nature of skeletal discrepancies. There was also little agreement regarding some treatment strategies, such as extraction of teeth, the use of orthopedic appliances, or the use of surgery. A need exists for better definitions of diagnostic criteria and appropriate treatment options.

This longitudinal study compared the periodontal status of bonded and banded molars in 20 adult and 40 adolescent patients before, during and after treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. Plaque accumulation (measured by the Plaque Index), gingival inflammation (measured by the Gingival Index and the bleeding tendency), and pocket depth were assessed by one examiner at sites along the mesio-buccal line angle of the maxillary right first molar and the mandibular left first molar. Assessments were made immediately prior to the placement of fixed appliances (pretreatment), at 1, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months after appliances were placed; and 3 months after appliances were removed (posttreatment). Loss of attachment between the pretreatment and posttreatment visits also was determined. At pretreatment, no significant differences were found in gingival inflammation between maxillary and mandibular banded and bonded molars. During treatment, both maxillary and mandibular banded molars showed significantly (p less than 0.05) greater gingival inflammation and plaque accumulation than did bonded molars. Three months after appliance removal, the maxillary molars that had been banded continued to show significantly more gingival inflammation and loss of attachment than did the maxillary molars that had been bonded. When all banded and bonded teeth were grouped by patient age, mean values for plaque accumulation and gingival inflammation in the maxillary molar regions were significantly greater for adolescents than for adults.