Search

Purpose. To explore the relationship between craniomaxillofacial features and psychological distress among adult pretreatment orthodontic patients. Methods. A group of 190 patients (95 males and 95 females) was included. Questionnaires including the Kessler psychological distress scale (K10) were sent to patients, and cephalograms were collected. Patients were divided into two groups according to K10 score: psychological distress group ( score ≥ 20 ) and no psychological distress group ( score < 20 ). Nineteen hard tissue and thirteen soft tissue parameters were traced on cephalograms to characterize the craniomaxillofacial features. Results. There was no significant difference in gender or age distribution between the two groups. Male patients with psychological distress showed statistically significantly larger anterior facial height (AFH) (126.62 mm vs. 120.97 mm), upper lip length (25.11 mm vs. 23.26 mm), and smaller overbite (1.21 mm vs. 2.75 mm) than patients without psychological distress. Male patients with hyperdivergent pattern and open bite were more likely to have psychological distress. None of the parameters showed statistical differences across groups in females. Frankfort-mandibular plane angle ( r = 0.235 ), Bjork’s sum ( r = 0.311 ), AFH ( r = 0.322 ), overbite ( r = − 0.238 ), AFH/posterior facial height ( r = 0.251 ), and upper anterior facial height (UAFH)/lower anterior facial height (LAFH) ( r = − 0.230 ) were correlated with K10 score in males. After adjusting gender and age, the AFH ( B = 0.147 ) and UAFH/LAFH ( B = − 14.923 ) were significantly related with the K10 score. Conclusion. Psychological distress was mainly correlated with hyperdivergent pattern, open bite, and larger lower anterior facial height proportion in pretreatment orthodontic patients. Orthodontists should be aware of the possible underlying psychological distress in patients with specific craniomaxillofacial features. Clinical assessment of psychological distress may need to take into account gender differences in patients.

Purpose. We aimed to explore the relationship between temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) and craniofacial morphology in orthodontic patients. Methods. Altogether, 262 orthodontic patients were included and divided into two groups according to their Fonseca Anamnestic Index (FAI) scores: a no-TMD group (control group, FAI