The timing and necessity of Phase I mixed dentition treatment in orthodontics have long been subjects of debate. This study aims to explore the level of agreement among clinicians in recommending Phase I treatment, the rationales behind such decisions, and the implications for Phase II treatment. MATERIALS and METHODS: A series of three surveys were administered to faculty members at the University of the Pacific, focusing on various aspects of Phase I and Phase II treatments. RESULTS: The study found a mild level of agreement among clinicians in recommending Phase I treatment, with transverse issues being the most cited reason. Despite this, the success of Phase I treatment did not consistently influence recommendations for Phase II treatment. The study also revealed that clinical practice, rather than educational background, significantly influences clinicians' decisions. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the complexity and subjectivity involved in clinical decision-making for Phase I treatment and underscore the need for further research to establish more definitive guidelines. Limitations of the study include a lack of diversity among the judges, suggesting the need for more inclusive future research.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:pacific.edu/oai:scholarlycommons.pacific.edu:dugoni_etd-1044 |
| Date | 01 January 2023 |
| Creators | Liu, Yidi |
| Publisher | Scholarly Commons |
| Source Sets | University of the Pacific |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | Orthodontics and Endodontics Theses |
Page generated in 0.0022 seconds