The influence of Bolton’s analysis and Peck & Peck index on the pre and post-treatment overjet: A retrospective study

Asaithambi Ashokraj; Sunny Sunil; Rathinasamy Ranganathan; Elango Elankalai; Venkatachalapathy Anusuya

doi:10.53730/ijhs.v6nS8.13544

Authors

Asaithambi Ashokraj PG Student, Department of Orthodontics, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College (DU), Salem, Tamilnadu
Sunny Sunil Professor & Head, Department of Orthodontics, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College (DU), Salem, Tamilnadu
Rathinasamy Ranganathan Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College (DU), Salem, Tamilnadu
Elango Elankalai Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College (DU), Salem, Tamilnadu
Venkatachalapathy Anusuya
vanusuya91@gmail.com
Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Vinayaka Mission's Sankarachariyar Dental College (DU), Salem, Tamilnadu

Keywords:

Bolton’s analysis, Peck & Peck index, overjet, orthodontic study models

Abstract

Background: To evaluate the relationship between the overjet with pre and post orthodontic treatmentBolton’s analysis and with Peck & Peck index. Materials and Methods: Pre and post-treatment orthodontic study models (n=30) of patients in the age range of 18 to 35 years, who underwent orthodontic treatment were evaluated for overjet, Bolton’s analysis (overall ratio & anterior ratio) and Peck & Peck index (in 31,32,41&42). A digital Vernier caliper was used for all the measurements. The collected data was analyzed in SPSS software using appropriate statistical tests based on normality to compare the pre- and post-treatment mean values and Pearson’s correlation was done between the Bolton’s analysis and Peck & Peck index with overjet. The p value <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: The Pearson’s correlation revealed an inverse correlation between Bolton’s anterior ratio and overjet (pre:-0.226, post:-0.254). The pre-treatment overjet with Peck & Peck index revealed an inverse correlation in PP 31 (-0.230) and positive correlation in other teeth. The correlation in the post-treatment overjet with Peck & Peck index was an inverse correlation in all teeth (-0.347; -0.184; -0.184 & -0.074 in PP31, PP32, PP41 & PP42 respectively).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alamir G, Tsay TP and Manasse RJ. Reliability Study of the Bolton Analysis using Dental Models from Cases Passed by the American Board of Orthodontics Clinical Examination. J. Dent Oral Disord 2017;3:1053.

Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Abdallah EM, Garcia AF. Comparisons of mesiodistal and bnccolingnal crown dimensions of the permanent teeth in three populations from Egypt, Mexico, and the United States. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989;96:416-22.

Bolton WA. Disharmony in tooth size and its relation to the analysis and treatment of malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1958;8:113-130.

Bolton WA. The clinical application of a tooth-size analysis. Am J Orthod 1962;48:504-29.

Carey CW. Linear arch dimension and tooth size; an evaluation of the bone and dental structures in cases involving the possible reduction of dental units in treatment. Am J Orthod 1949;35:762-775.

Hawley CA. Determination of the normal arch, and its application to orthodontia. Dental cosmos 1905;47:541-52.

Hixon EH, Oldfather RE. Estimation of the sizes of unerupted cuspid and bicuspid teeth. Angle Orthod 1958;28:236-40.

Howes AE. Case analysis and treatment planning based upon the relationship of the tooth material to its supporting bone. Am J Orthod 1947;33:499-533.

Joondeph DR, Riedel RA, Moore AW. Pont's index: a clinical evaluation. Angle Orthod 1970;40:112-8.

Kirschen RH, O'Higgins EA, Lee RT. The Royal London Space Planning: an integration of space analysis and treatment planning: part I:assessing the space required to meet treatment objectives. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2000;118:448-55.

Laino A, Quaremba G, Paduano S, Stanzione S. Prevalence of tooth-size discrepancy among different malocclusion groups. Prog Orthod 2003;4:37-44.

Lavelle CL. Maxillary and mandibular tooth size in different racial groups and in different occlusal categories. Am J Orthod 1972;61:29-37.

Lavelle CL. Variation in the secular changes in the teeth and dental arches. Angle Orthod 1973;43:412-21.

Lundstrom AF. Malocclusion of the teeth regarded as a problem in connection with the apical base. Int. J. Orthod Oral Surg Radiogr 1925;11:1109-33.

Musich DR, Ackerman JL. The catenometer: a reliable device for estimating dental arch perimeter. Am J Orthod 1973;63:366-75.

Peck H, Peck S. An index for assessing tooth shape deviations as applied to the mandibular incisors. Am J Orthod 1972;61:384-401.

Peck S, Peck H. Crown dimensions and mandibular incisor alignment. Angle Orthod. 1972;42:148-53.

Rees DJ. A method for assessing the proportional relation of apical bases and contact diameters of the teeth. Am J Orthod 1953;39:695-707.

Santoro M, Ayoub ME, Pardi VA, Cangialosi TJ. Mesiodistal crown dimensions and tooth size discrepancy of the permanent dentition of Dominican Americans. Angle Orthod 2000;70:303-307.

Schirmer UR, Wiltshire WA. Manual and computer-aided space analysis: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;112:676-80.

Smith SS, Buschang PH, Watanabe E. Interarch tooth size relationships of 3 populations:“Does Bolton’s analysis apply?”. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2000;117:169-74.

Steadman SR. Predetermining the overbite and overjet. Angle Orthod. 1949;19:101-5.

Turtinen H, Sarja M, Hyvärinen J, Pirhonen P, Pesonen P, Pirttiniemi P, Silvola AS. Associations between Bolton ratio and overjet deviations in a Finnish adult population. Acta Odontol Scand 2021;17;79:593-9.

Worms FW, Speidel TM, Isaacson RJ, Meskin LH. Pont’s index and dental arch form. J Am Dent Assoc 1972;85:876-81.