The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login



Volume / Issue

Online First

Related articles

VOLUME 23 , ISSUE 3 ( March, 2022 ) > List of Articles


Epidemiology of Facial Profiles, Occlusal Features, and Orthodontic Treatment Need among Adolescence: A Cross-sectional Study

Abdulwahab Alhadad, Khalid Aldhorae, Mohammed M Al Moaleem, Mohammed A Al-labani, Kadejh A Kofiyh, Khalid ALjawfi, Ali Mohammed M Abdulrab, Mohammed A Alraawi, Nour M Alshakhs, Muqbil S Alqahtani, Zainab M Altawili

Keywords : Esthetic component index, Facial profile, Index of treatment need, Malocclusion

Citation Information : Alhadad A, Aldhorae K, Moaleem MM, Al-labani MA, Kofiyh KA, ALjawfi K, Abdulrab AM, Alraawi MA, Alshakhs NM, Alqahtani MS, Altawili ZM. Epidemiology of Facial Profiles, Occlusal Features, and Orthodontic Treatment Need among Adolescence: A Cross-sectional Study. J Contemp Dent Pract 2022; 23 (3):313-319.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3258

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 24-06-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Aims: This study aimed to investigate the incidence and severity of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment needs among randomly selected high school students. Methods: A multistage stratified random-sampling study was conducted on 1,036 high school students in Sana'a city. The World Dental Federation and World Health Organization method of occlusal traits and the index of orthodontic treatment need were adopted for measurements. Clinically, the molar relationship and facial profile were examined. Assessment of whether examiner or subject perceived the need for orthodontic treatment was made using the esthetic component index. All data were analyzed using the Chi-square test with a significance level of p <0.05. Results: Normal, convex, and concave facial-profile measurements were found in 81.9, 12.1, and 6.15% of sampled students, respectively. Asymmetrical molar relationship was observed in 16.1% of samples, and most of them were of class I/class II relationships. Increased overjet was noticed in 90.9% of students. Anterior crossbite, deepbite, anterior openbite, posterior openbite, posterior crossbite, and scissor bite accounted for 12.2, 12.8, 3.5, 1.3, 6.6, and 0.6%, respectively. According to the index orthodontic treatment need, 38.9% of students needed some form of orthodontic treatment. Among these cases, 24.3% “definitely” needed treatment, and 59.9% of students needed orthodontic treatment. Conclusion: Our findings suggested a call for a more conservative treatment approach in dealing with malocclusion problems among high school students in all zones of Sana'a governorate, Yemen. Clinical significance: A limited number of surveys were performed in Sana'a Governorate to investigate orthodontic treatment needs, facial profiles, and occlusal features among adolescents. The results of this study could guide us to develop a preventive system that minimizes its adverse effects and the need for costly orthodontic treatments.

PDF Share
  1. Bezroukov V, Freer T, Helm S, et al. Basic method for recording occlusal traits. Bull World Health Org 1979;57(6):955. PMID: 317023.
  2. Figueroa FR, Bancalari C, Cartes-Velásquez R, et al. Prevalence of malocclusion and its psychosocial impact in a sample of Chilean adolescents aged 14 to 18 years old. J Int Dent Med Res 2017;10(1):14.
  3. Gudipaneni RK, Aldahmeshi RF, Patil SR, et al. The prevalence of malocclusion and the need for orthodontic treatment among adolescents in the northern border region of Saudi Arabia: an epidemiological study. BMC Oral Health 2018;18(1):16. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-018-0476-8.
  4. Lubis HF, Lubis MM, Bahirrah S. The facial profile analysis of adolescents in Medan. J Int Dent Med Res 2018;11(3):967–970.
  5. Siécola GS, Capelozza Filho L, Lorenzoni DC, et al. Subjective facial analysis and its correlation with dental relationships. Dent Press J Orthod 2017;22(2):87–94. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.2.087-094.oar.
  6. Angle EH. Classification of malocclusion. Dent Cosmos 1899;41: 350–375.
  7. Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod 1989;11(3):309–320. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035999.
  8. Richmond S, Buchanan I, Burden D, et al. Calibration of dentists in the use of occlusal indices. Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol 1995;23(3): 173–176. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.1995.tb00224.x.
  9. Al-Zubair NM. Orthodontic treatment need of Yemeni children assessed with dental aesthetic index. J Orthod Sci 2014;3:41–45. DOI: 10.4103/2278-0203.132913.
  10. Al-Zubair NM, Idris FA, Al-Selwi FM. The subjective orthodontic treatment need assessed with the aesthetic component of the index of orthodontic treatment need. Saudi J Dent Res 2015;6:9–14. DOI: 10.1016/j.sjdr.2014.02.003.
  11. Draker HL. Handicapping labio-lingual deviations: a proposed index for public health purposes. Am J Orthod 1960;46(4):295–305. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(60)90197-4.
  12. Baume LJ. A method for measuring occlusal traits: Fédération Dentaire Internationale; 1974.
  13. Richmond S, O'Brien KD, Roberts CT, et al. Dentists variation in the determination of orthodontic treatment need. Brit J Orthod 1994;21:65–68. DOI: 10.1179/bjo.21.1.65.
  14. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson B, et al. Contemporary orthodontics-e-book: Elsevier Health Sciences; 2018.
  15. Viera AJ, Garrete GJ. Understanding interobserver agreement: the kappa statistic. Fam Med 2005;37(5):360–363. PMID: 15883903.
  16. Basalamah KB. Prevalence of oro-dental anomalies among schoolchildren in Sana'a city, Yemen. East Mediterr Health J 2016;22(1):34–39. PMID: 27117648.
  17. Aldhorae KA, Altawili ZM, Assiry A, et al. Prevalence and distribution of dental anomalies among a sample of orthodontic and non-orthodontic patients: a retrospective study. J Int Oral Health 2019;11(5):309. DOI: 10.4103/jioh.jioh_199_19.
  18. Laganà G, Venza N, Borzabadi-Farahani A, et al. Dental anomalies: prevalence and associations between them in a large sample of non-orthodontic subjects, a cross-sectional study. BMC Oral Health 2017;17(1):62. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-017-0352-y.
  19. Sanjeevi J, Arun A, Subhashini M. Prevalence of midline diastema in school children in Chennai–a cross-sectional study. Drug Invent Today 2019;12(2).
  20. Hasan HS, Al Azzawi AM, Kolemen A. Pattern of distribution and etiologies of Midline diastema among Kurdistan-region population. J Clin Exp Dent 2020;12(10):e938–e943. DOI: 10.4317/jced.57122.
  21. Lin M, Xie C, Yang H, et al. Prevalence of malocclusion in Chinese schoolchildren from 1991 to 2018: a systematic review and meta-analysis. International journal of paediatric dentistry 2020;30(2): 144–155. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12591.
  22. Ausim S, Hamid S. Status of malocclusion in 9–12-year-old children: a survey among private and public schools of Islamabad. J Med Res Health Educ 2017;1:1.
  23. Alajlan SS, Alsaleh MK, Alshammari AF, et al. The prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need of school children in Northern Saudi Arabia. J Orthod Sci 2019;8:10. DOI: 10.4103/jos.JOS_104_18.
  24. Chaturvedi M, Chaturvedi N. Prevalence of malocclusion in permanent dentition among adolescents of age 13–16-years-old–a cross sectional study. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res 2019;7.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.