Comparison of treatment outcome of Invisalign(RTM) and traditional fixed orthodontics by model analysis using ABO Objective Grading System
MetadataShow full item record
Introduction. Invisalign® has become one of the very popular treatment modalities requested by patients to straighten their teeth. However, there has been great controversy among clinicians about the effectiveness of this new treatment modality. Indeed, there are very few studies that report the effectiveness and appropriateness of Invisalign®. It was thus the goal of this retrospective study to help clinicians in deciding whether Invisalign® is appropriate to their patients or not. Materials and Methods. Sixty-seven patients with Class I malocclusion, mild crowing and some overbite were included in this study. All cases had Discrepancy Index (DI) less than 5 and were treated non-extraction. All patients had full permanent dentition and no missing teeth. Thirty-four patients were treated with traditional fixed orthodontics (braces group) and 33 patients were treated with Invisalign®. All patients were treated in a private clinic in Buffalo, New York, by the same practitioner. The posttreatment models were graded using the ABO Objective Grading System (OGS) to assess the treatment outcome of both groups. Paired t-test was used to analyze the data collected in this study. Results. There was no statistical significant differences between the scores of the Invisalign® group and Braces group for Alignment (p=0.059), Occlusal Relationship (p=0.223) and Interproximal Contacts. The Invislaign® group had higher scores in Marginal ridges, Bucco-lingual inclination, Occlusal Contacts, and Overjet than Braces group. Conclusion. According to OGS, Invisalign® can treat mild malocclusion with DI less than 5 as efficiently, if not better, as braces. This study helps clinicians to determine which patients are best suited for Invisalign® treatment.