Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/a-0809-2809
„Two-Phase Treatment“ und skelettale Klasse III
Two-Phase Treatment and Skeletal Class III*Publication History
Publication Date:
19 March 2019 (online)
Zusammenfassung
Das sogenannte „Two-Phase Treatment“ gerät immer wieder in den Fokus der ökonomisch orientierten Wissenschaft. Diese Überprüfung ist sinnvoll, stehen doch Vorwürfe wie Übertherapie, zusätzliche Kosten und Belastungen für Patient, Eltern und Arzt im Raum. In dieser kontroversen Diskussion scheint die Kenntnis über grundlegende Konzepte einer Frühbehandlung vollkommen verloren gegangen zu sein. Die Überprüfung medizinischer Hypothesen tritt zugunsten einer gerätelastigen Forschung in den Hintergrund, die den Fokus auf die Apparatur und nicht auf den kausalen Wirkmechanismus gerichtet hat. Begiffe wie „fixed Appliances“, „removable Appliances” als auch “One-, Two-Phase Treatment” simplifizieren die Konzepte der Funktionskieferorthopädie, der Orofazialen Orthopädie sowie der Funktionellen Orthopädie und tragen damit zur Fehlinterpretation aktueller Studien bei. Die Anwendungen im kraniofazialen Skelett lassen sich weit zurückverfolgen, sodass die Kieferorthopädie als Teilgebiet der funktionellen Orthopädie gesehen und nicht mit Mechaniken der Orthodontie verglichen werden kann.
Abstract
The so-called „two-phase treatment“ repeatedly comes into the focus of economically oriented science. This examination is sensible, since reproaches such as overtherapy, additional costs and loads for patient, parents and physician are frequently made. In this controversial discussion the knowledge about fundamental concepts of an early treatment seems to have been lost completely. The investigation of medical hypotheses has receded into the background in favor of equipment-based research, which has focused on the appliances and not on the causal mechanism of action. Terms such as fixed appliances, removable appliances and one-phase or two-phase treatment simplify the concepts of functional orthodontics, orofacial orthopedics and functional orthopedics and thus contribute to the misinterpretation of current studies. The applications in the craniofacial skeleton can be traced back far, so that orthodontics can be seen as a branch of functional orthopedics and cannot be compared with orthodontic mechanics.
* Dieser Artikel beruht auf einem Vortrag, gehalten auf dem XXIII. Jahreskongress des German Board of Orthodontics 2018 zum Thema „Two-Phase Treatment“
-
Literatur
- 1 Mir CF. One-phase or two-phase orthodontic treatment?. Evidence-Based Dentistry 2016; 17: 107-108 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401201
- 2 Smyth RSD, Ryan FS. Early treatment of class III malocclusion with facemask. Evidence-Based Dentistry 2017; 18: 107-108 https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ebd.6401269
- 3 Lin Y, Guo R, Hou L. et al. Stability of maxillary protraction therapy in children with Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Oral Investigations 2018; 22: 2639-2652 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-018-2363-8
- 4 Mandall N, Cousley R, DiBiase A. et al. Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial. Journal of Orthodontics 2016; 43: 164-175 https://doi.org/10.1080/14653125.2016.1201302
- 5 Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J, Kersten G. Effects of protraction mechanics on the midface. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics : Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 1998; 114: 484-491 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70167-2
- 6 Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Kang HK, Dhawan A. et al. Comparison of early treatment outcomes rendered in three different types of malocclusions. Angle Orthodontist 2018; 88: 253-258 https://doi.org/10.2319/091417-618.1
- 7 Suresh M, Ratnaditya A, Kattimani VS. et al. One Phase versus Two Phase Treatment in Mixed Dentition: A Critical Review. Journal of International Oral Health: JIOH 2015; 7: 144-147
- 8 Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 12: Two controversies: early treatment and occlusion. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics: Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 2006; 130: 799-804 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.019
- 9 Angle EH. Classification of malocclusion. Dental Cosmos 1899; 41 248–264 350-357
- 10 Karwetzky R. Der U-Bügelaktivator. Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 1967; 28: 429-432
- 11 Karwetzky R. Der U-Bügelaktivator. Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 1967; 28: 429-432
- 12 Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 9: functional appliances to midcentury. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics : Official Publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics 2006; 129: 829-833 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.019
- 13 Häupl K. Gewebsumbau und Zahnverdrängung in der Funktions-Kieferorthopädie. Leipzig: Barth; 1938
- 14 Wolff J. Die Lehre von der functionellen Knochengestalt. Archiv Für Pathologische Anatomie und Physiologie und für klinische Medicin 1899; 155: 256-315 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01994769
- 15 Fränkel R, Fränkel C. Clinical implication of Roux’s concept in orofacial orthopedics. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics=Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/Official Journal Deutsche Gesellschaft für Kieferorthopadie 2001; 62: 1-21 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-001-0037-6
- 16 Fränkel R. 1999 Persönliche Kommunikation.
- 17 Frost HM. Changing concepts in skeletal physiology: Wolff’s Law, the Mechanostat, and the “Utah Paradigm”. American Journal of Human Biology : The Official Journal of the Human Biology Council 1998; 10: 599-605 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6300(1998)10:5<599:AID-AJHB6>3.0.CO;2-9
- 18 Roux WH. Der Kampf der Teile im Organismus. Wilhelm Engelmann; Leipzig: 1881
- 19 Andresen V, Häupl K. Funktions-Kieferorthopadie. Die Grundlagen des Norwegischen Systems. ed. 4 Leipzig: 1945. Johann Ambrosius Barth
- 20 Karwetzky R. Indications for U-bow activators. Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie 1984; 45: 45-48 Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6590438
- 21 Darwin Charles. 1859. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (Full image view 1st ed.). London: John Murray;
- 22 Charles H.Kahn. (Hrsg.) The art and thought of Heraclitus. Cambridge: 1979: 205-210
- 23 Hippocrates. On Airs, Waters, and Places, written 400 B.C.E, Translated by Francis Adams http://classics.mit.edu/Hippocrates/airwatpl.html (abgerufen am 01.10.2018)
- 24 https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabzon (abgerufen am 01.10.2018)
- 25 Schijman E. Artificial cranial deformation in newborns in the pre-Columbian Andes. Child’s Nervous System 2005; 21: 945-950 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00381-004-1127-8
- 26 Hotz RP. The Changing Pattern of European Orthodontics. British Journal of Orthodontics 1973; 1: 4-8 https://doi.org/10.1179/bjo.1.1.4
- 27 Khan NA, Nguyen CL, Khawar T et al. Association of author’s financial conflict of interest with characteristics and outcome of rheumatoid arthritis randomized controlled trials. Rheumatology (Oxford, England) 2018 https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/key368
- 28 Ioannidis JPA. The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. The Milbank Quarterly 2016; 94: 485-514 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12210