English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Objective:  To analyze any differences in the orthodontic treatment between children belonging to a particular subgroup of subjects with special health care needs (SHCN), children with craniofacial anomalies (CFA), and children not diagnosed with SHCN (NO SHCN). Materials and Methods:  The study sample consisted of 50 children with SHCN and a confirmed diagnosis of CFA (SHCN/CFA); the control group consisted of 50 NO SHCN children fully matched for age, gender, and type of appliance used. The differences between the two groups were analyzed retrospectively: pre-, posttreatment scores, and score reduction of the Peer Assessment Rating Index (PAR), dental health component (DHC), and aesthetic component (AC) of Orthodontic Treatment Need Index (IOTN), number of appointments, number of simple or complex chair-time appointments, overall treatment time, and age at treatment start and end. Results:  There were no statistically significant differences between the SHCN/CFA and NO SHCN groups for number of appointments, overall treatment time, age at treatment start, and age at treatment end (P  =  .682, .458, .535, and .675, respectively). There were statistically significant differences between groups in PAR, DHC, AC pre- and posttreatment, and number of simple and complex chair-time appointments (P  =  .030 and .000; .020 and .023; .000 and .000; .043; and .037; respectively). The reduction of PAR, DHC, and AC scores was not significantly different between groups (P  =  .060, .765, and .825, respectively). Conclusion:  The treatment of children with SHCN, in general, and with CFA, in particular, on the one hand involves a higher rate of using complex chair time appointments and an inferior treatment outcome, by the other side implies an overall treatment time and a reduction of PAR, DHC or AC scores similar to the treatment of children not diagnosed with SHCN.

the angle orthodontist

Orthodontic treatment of a particular subgroup of children with special health care needs, children with craniofacial anomalies: An analysis of treatment length and clinical outcome