Abstract

Introduction

The adequate indications for the timing of treatment for Class II malocclusion are mandatory for the ethical and efficient practice of orthodontics, but clinicians are reluctant to accept new information that contradicts their preferred method of treatment.

Objective

The aim of this investigation was to assess the agreement regarding the indications for Class II malocclusion interceptive therapy between a group of international opinion-makers on early treatment and a group of orthodontists and to compare their treatment indications with the current evidence-based knowledge.

Material and method

An electronic survey containing photographs of mild, moderate and severe Class II malocclusions in children was sent to two panels of experts. Panel 1 (n=28) was composed of international orthodontists who had authored world-class publications on early orthodontic treatment, and Panel 2 (n=261) was composed of clinical orthodontists. Based on a 5-point Likert-type scale, the orthodontists selected their therapy option for each of the 9 Class II malocclusion cases.

Result

The Class II malocclusion treatment recommendations of Panel 2 were significantly different from those offered by Panel 1 with a skew of at least 1 scale point toward earlier treatment. The Class II malocclusion treatment recommendations of the members of Panel 1 members were in accordance with contemporary evidence-based knowledge.

Conclusion

Class II malocclusion overtreatment appears to be the tendency among clinical orthodontists but not among orthodontists who are academically involved with early treatment. There is a gap between the scientific knowledge and the practices of orthodontists.

Descriptors:
Malocclusion, Angle Class II; therapeutics; questionnaires