The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 4 , ISSUE 4 ( November, 2003 ) > List of Articles


Orthodontic Treatment Planning: Do Orthodontists Treat to Cephalometric Norms?

Khalid M. Al-Balkhi

Citation Information : Al-Balkhi KM. Orthodontic Treatment Planning: Do Orthodontists Treat to Cephalometric Norms?. J Contemp Dent Pract 2003; 4 (4):12-27.

DOI: 10.5005/jcdp-4-4-12

License: CC BY-NC 3.0

Published Online: 01-11-2005

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2003; The Author(s).



Al-Balkhi KM. Orthodontic Treatment Planning: Do Orthodontists Treat to Cephalometric Norms? J Contemp Dent Pract 2003 November;(4)4:012-027.

PDF Share
  1. al. Cephalometric norms in Japanese adults. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1998 Feb;56(2):129-34.
  2. A comparison of outcomes of orthodontic and surgicalorthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992 Jun;101(6):556-65.
  3. An assessment of treatment outcome in American Board of Orthodontics cases. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 Mar;111(3):335-42.
  4. Handbook of Orthodontics 4 th ed. Chicago 1988, Y.B.M.P.
  5. al. The PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): methods to determine outcome of orthodontic treatment in terms of improvement and standards. Eur J Orthod. 1992 Jun;14(3):180-7.
  6. Contemporary Orthodontics 2 nd ed. USA, 1992 Mosby.
  7. al. An Atlas of Craniofacial Growth 2 nd ed., Center for Human Growth and Development. The University of Michigan 1973.
  8. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg. 1980 Oct;38(10):744-51.
  9. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York 1940. Interscience Publication.
  10. Biostatistical Analysis 2 nd ed. Prentia-Hall. International Inc. N.J. USA page 156-158.
  11. Orthodontics in the General Dental Services of England and Wales: the provision of treatment. Br Dent J. 1992 Feb 22;172(4):150-2.
  12. Orthodontic treatment standards in Norway. Eur J Orthod. 1993 Feb;15(1):7-15.
  13. Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome: follow-up until 10 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Mar;115(3):300-4.
  14. A closer look at General Dental Service orthodontics in England and Wales. I: Factors influencing effectiveness. Br Dent J. 1999 Aug 28;187(4):211-6.
  15. Inhibition or stimulation of the vertical growth of the facial complex, its significance to treatment. Angle Orthod. 1967 Oct;37(4):285-97. No abstract available.
  16. Effects of cervical anchorage during and after treatment: an implant study. Am J Orthod. 1978 May;73(5):526-40.
  17. Change in relationship of points A and B during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1956;42:176-93.
  18. The effects of extraction and nonextraction treatment on the mandibular position. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991 Nov;100(5):443-52.
  19. Mandibular growth direction with conventional Class II nonextraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992 Jun;101(6):543-9.
  20. al. Mandibular plane changes during maxillary retraction. Am J Orthod. 1978 Jul;74(1):32-40. No abstract available.
  21. Posttreatment changes of skeletal morphology following treatment aimed at restriction of maxillary growth. Am J Orthod. 1985 Oct;88(4):288-96.
  22. al. A cephalometric appraisal of edgewise Class II nonextraction treatment with extraoral force. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988 Apr;93(4):315-24.
  23. Variations in the growth pattern of the human mandible: longitudinal radiographic study by the implant method. J Dent Res. 1963 Jan-Feb;42(1)Pt 2:400-11. No abstract available.
  24. Retrospective on progressive dentofacial changes after treatment and retention. J Clin Orthod. 1970 Apr;4(4):193-206. No abstract available.
  25. Retrospective on progressive dentofacial changes after treatment and retention. 4. J Clin Orthod. 1970 Jul;4(7):407-17. No abstract available.
  26. Physiologic recovery after cervical traction therapy. Am J Orthod. 1974 Sep;66(3):294-301. No abstract available.
  27. Cephalometric for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729-55.
  28. The Frankfort mandibular incisor angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis, treatment planning, and prognosis. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1954;24:121-69.
  29. A textbook of Orthodontics, 2 nd Ed., UK 1992, Wright.
  30. Periodontal profile changes in orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1961;47:371-9.
  31. An analysis of dentofacial relationships. Am J Orthod 1977;72:165-75.
  32. Changes in nasolabial angle related to maxillary incisor retraction. Am J Orthod. 1982 Nov;82(5):384-91.
  33. Soft tissue facial profile changes after orthodontic treatment with four premolars extracted. Angle Orthod. 1994;64(1):31-42.
  34. al. Comparison of the changes in facial profile after orthodontic treatment, with and without extractions. Br J Orthod. 1997 Feb;24(1):25-34.
  35. A Textbook of Orthodontics 2 nd Ed UK 1993, Wright.
  36. Dentofacial changes in patients with Class III malocclusions treated by a combination of activator and chin-cup appliances. Aust Orthod J. 1997 Mar;14(4):225-8.
  37. Facial balance and harmony: an attainable objective for the patient with a high mandibular plane angle. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Aug;114(2):176-88.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.