IADR Abstract Archives
Marginal Ridge Discrepancy Post-Orthodontic Treatment and Changes in Bone Level
Objectives: The American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) utilizes the objective grading system (OGS) containing eight criteria, one being marginal ridge alignment with an acceptable height discrepancy of 0.5mm or less. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the implications of marginal ridge discrepancy measured in the study cast models as it relates to periodontal health assessed by radiographic bone level measurements in relation to cemento-enamel junction (CEJ).
Methods: Bitewings and study models of 25 subjects with an age range of 16-30 years who had completed treatment in the Department of Orthodontics were used. To compare marginal ridge discrepancy to bone levels in relation to the CEJ, the radiographic distance from CEJ to alveolar crest will be measured using an imaging software from the mesial of the first molar, mesial and distal of the second premolar, and the distal of the first premolar for a total of 4 points per sextant that adds up to a maximum of 16 measurements per subject. Marginal ridge discrepancy will be graded using the ABO grading tool on casts taken at 2-year recall visit. Either Pearson correlations or Spearman rank correlations (depending on distribution of data) will be used to examine the correlation between the marginal ridge and radiographic measurements. Each individual site will be the unit of analysis. A p-value of <0.05 will be deemed to be statistically significant.
Results: Initial electronic health record screening revealed that there were 30 patient records that will qualify for the assessment. We are in the process of obtaining human subject use approval.
Conclusions: Through this study, the current ABO standards of marginal ridge alignment as it relates to periodontal health will either be supported or disputed, both resulting in improved patient care.
Methods: Bitewings and study models of 25 subjects with an age range of 16-30 years who had completed treatment in the Department of Orthodontics were used. To compare marginal ridge discrepancy to bone levels in relation to the CEJ, the radiographic distance from CEJ to alveolar crest will be measured using an imaging software from the mesial of the first molar, mesial and distal of the second premolar, and the distal of the first premolar for a total of 4 points per sextant that adds up to a maximum of 16 measurements per subject. Marginal ridge discrepancy will be graded using the ABO grading tool on casts taken at 2-year recall visit. Either Pearson correlations or Spearman rank correlations (depending on distribution of data) will be used to examine the correlation between the marginal ridge and radiographic measurements. Each individual site will be the unit of analysis. A p-value of <0.05 will be deemed to be statistically significant.
Results: Initial electronic health record screening revealed that there were 30 patient records that will qualify for the assessment. We are in the process of obtaining human subject use approval.
Conclusions: Through this study, the current ABO standards of marginal ridge alignment as it relates to periodontal health will either be supported or disputed, both resulting in improved patient care.