Outcome Assessment of Orthodontic Clear Aligner Vs Fixed Appliance Treatment in a Teenage Population with Mild Malocclusions

Overview

Journal Angle Orthod

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2020 Dec 30

PMID 33378505

Citations 25

Authors

Alissa F Borda

Judah S Garfinkle

David A Covell

Mansen Wang

Larry Doyle

Christine M Sedgley

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the efficacy and efficiency of treatment in adolescents presenting with mild malocclusions, comparing outcomes using clear aligners to fixed appliances.

Materials And Methods: Patients identified retrospectively and consecutively from one private practice had been treated with either clear aligners (Invisalign, Align Technology, Santa Clara, Calif) or fixed appliances (0.022 Damon, Ormco, Orange, Calif; n = 26/group). Assessments of occlusion were made using the American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (DI) for initial records and Cast-Radiograph Evaluation (CRE) for final records. Number of appointments, number of emergency visits, and overall treatment time were determined from chart reviews. Data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation, Wilcoxon rank tests, unpaired t-tests, and Chi-square tests, with significance set to P ≤ .05.

Results: Pretreatment, the aligner and fixed groups showed no significant difference in overall severity (DI: 11.9 ± 5.3 vs 11.6 ± 4.8) or in any individual DI category. Posttreatment scores showed finishes for the aligner group had fewer discrepancies from ideal relative to the fixed appliance group (CRE: 30.1 ± 8.3 vs 37.0 ± 9.3; P < .01). Patients treated with aligners had fewer appointments (13.7 ± 4.4 vs 19.3 ± 3.6; P < .0001), fewer emergency visits (0.8 ± 1.0 vs 3.6 ± 2.5; P < .0001), and shorter overall treatment time (16.9 ± 5.7 vs 23.4 ± 4.4 months; P < .0001).

Conclusions: Outcomes for treatment of mild malocclusions in adolescents showed equivalent effectiveness of clear aligners compared to fixed appliances, with significantly improved results for clear aligner treatment in terms of tooth alignment, occlusal relations, and overjet. Assessment of the number of appointments, number of emergency visits, and overall treatment time showed better outcomes for treatment with clear aligners.

Citing Articles

Effects of clear aligners treatment in growing patients: a systematic review.

DAnto V, De Simone V, Caruso S, Bucci P, Valletta R, Rongo R Front Oral Health. 2025; 5():1512838.

PMID: 39834783 PMC: 11744020. DOI: 10.3389/froh.2024.1512838.

Age-stratified assessment of orthodontic tooth movement outcomes with clear aligners.

Chaluparambil M, Arqub S, Kuo C, Godoy L, Upadhyay M, Yadav S Prog Orthod. 2024; 25(1):43.

PMID: 39523241 PMC: 11551086. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-024-00542-2.

Effectiveness of palatal anchorage device (PAD) for maxillary anterior retraction with clear aligners using finite element study.

Lin S, Lu T, Zhang H, Wang W, Han L, Mei L Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):26176.

PMID: 39478079 PMC: 11525565. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-77320-x.

Evaluation of effects of different sizes and shapes of attachments during rotation, tipping, and torquing in clear aligner therapy - A finite element study.

Pede K, Shetty P, Ranjan A, Khan W, Patil H, Mishra H J Orthod Sci. 2024; 13:30.

PMID: 39450220 PMC: 11500733. DOI: 10.4103/jos.jos_199_23.

Efficiency of clear aligners with nickel titanium wires for treating mandibular incisor crowding.

Verghese Y, Savana K, Khattar B, Altaher Mohammed O, Batham P, Pereira Kalia U Bioinformation. 2024; 20(8):917-920.

PMID: 39411771 PMC: 11471407. DOI: 10.6026/973206300200917.

References

Djeu G, Shelton C, Maganzini A . Outcome assessment of Invisalign and traditional orthodontic treatment compared with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128(3):292-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.002. View

Hennessy J, Garvey T, Al-Awadhi E . A randomized clinical trial comparing mandibular incisor proclination produced by fixed labial appliances and clear aligners. Angle Orthod. 2016; 86(5):706-12. PMC: 8600838. DOI: 10.2319/101415-686.1. View

Pulfer R, Drake C, Maupome G, Eckert G, Eugene Roberts W . The association of malocclusion complexity and orthodontic treatment outcomes. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79(3):468-72. DOI: 10.2319/042308-227.1. View

Boyd R . Esthetic orthodontic treatment using the invisalign appliance for moderate to complex malocclusions. J Dent Educ. 2008; 72(8):948-67. View

Boskey A, Coleman R . Aging and bone. J Dent Res. 2010; 89(12):1333-48. PMC: 2991386. DOI: 10.1177/0022034510377791. View

BRIDGES T, King G, Mohammed A . The effect of age on tooth movement and mineral density in the alveolar tissues of the rat. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 93(3):245-50. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(88)80010-6. View

Cangialosi T, Riolo M, Owens Jr S, Dykhouse V, Moffitt A, Grubb J . The ABO discrepancy index: a measure of case complexity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125(3):270-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.01.005. View

Ren Y, Maltha J, van t Hof M, Kuijpers-Jagtman A . Age effect on orthodontic tooth movement in rats. J Dent Res. 2003; 82(1):38-42. DOI: 10.1177/154405910308200109. View

Akinci Cansunar H, Uysal T . Relationship between pretreatment case complexity and orthodontic clinical outcomes determined by the American Board of Orthodontics criteria. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84(6):974-9. PMC: 8638490. DOI: 10.2319/010114-001.1. View

10.

Gu J, Tang J, Skulski B, Fields Jr H, Beck F, Firestone A . Evaluation of Invisalign treatment effectiveness and efficiency compared with conventional fixed appliances using the Peer Assessment Rating index. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017; 151(2):259-266. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.06.041. View

11.

Hajeer M, Millett D, Ayoub A, Siebert J . Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: part II. J Orthod. 2004; 31(2):154-62. DOI: 10.1179/146531204225020472. View

12.

Lagravere M, Flores-Mir C . The treatment effects of Invisalign orthodontic aligners: a systematic review. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005; 136(12):1724-9. DOI: 10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0117. View

13.

Kuncio D, Maganzini A, Shelton C, Freeman K . Invisalign and traditional orthodontic treatment postretention outcomes compared using the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(5):864-9. DOI: 10.2319/100106-398.1. View

14.

Kyomen S, Tanne K . Influences of aging changes in proliferative rate of PDL cells during experimental tooth movement in rats. Angle Orthod. 1997; 67(1):67-72. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1997)067<0067:IOACIP>2.3.CO;2. View

15.

Casko J, Vaden J, Kokich V, Damone J, James R, Cangialosi T . Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. American Board of Orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114(5):589-99. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70179-9. View

16.

Li W, Wang S, Zhang Y . The effectiveness of the Invisalign appliance in extraction cases using the the ABO model grading system: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8(5):8276-82. PMC: 4509355. View

17.

Pavoni C, Lione R, Lagana G, Cozza P . Self-ligating versus Invisalign: analysis of dento-alveolar effects. Ann Stomatol (Roma). 2012; 2(1-2):23-7. PMC: 3254387. View

18.

Hennessy J, Al-Awadhi E . Clear aligners generations and orthodontic tooth movement. J Orthod. 2015; 43(1):68-76. DOI: 10.1179/1465313315Y.0000000004. View