Abstract
A statistical survey on the treatment stage and the occlusal condition after active orthodontic treatment was carried out on 532 cleft lip and/or palate patients (288 males and 244 females)whose diagnostic data were taken in the Orthodontic Clinic of Hiroshima University Dental Hospital from April 1968 to March 1989.
The results were as follow s:
1. The incidence of each tre a tment stage in March,1991 was as follows; before or during treatment 34.0%, during or after retention 37.8%, transfer or discontinuance 26.8%.
2. The incidence of each occlusal condition at the end of active trea t ment in 186 cases during or after retention patients was as follows: good occlusion in both anterior and posterior teeth (GOOD) 55.9%, poor occlusion with cross bite or open bite in more than two adjacent anterior or posterior teet h (POOR) 12.4% and others (MEDIOCRE) 31.7%. When the cases whose occlusion was evaluated as MEDIOCRE but was considered as the limit of the present orthodontic treatment result because of alveolar bone defects at the cleft site were included in GOOD, good occlusion was acquired in 71.0%of cleft patients at the end of active orthodontic treatment.
1) The occlusion of cleft lip patients and cleft lip and alveolous patients was not evaluated as POOR, but the occlusion of 18.1% of unilateral cleft lip and palate patients,12.5% of bilateral cleft lip and palate patients and 7.7% of cleft palate patients were evaluated as POOR.
2) When only the patients whose ative treatment was finished afte r 1981 were evaluated, the incidence of GOOD increased to 59.9%.
3. The incidence of maxi l lary retainers which were known to be in 200 patients was as follows: resin plate-122 patients, bonded lingual retainer-38 patients, bonded lingual retainer with resin plate or lingual arch-23 patients, other retainers-12 patients and without retainer-5 patients.
4. After the end of active treatment (during retention), the occlusion wa s changed to POOR in 19.3% of GOOD patients and 29.2% of MEDIOCRE patients.
5. The incidence of maxillary prosthesis which were known to be in 61 patients was as follows: bridge-24 patients, metal plate-16 patients, bridge and metal plate-7 patients and others-14 patients. Maxillary prosthesis was not indicated in 19 patients.
6. After prosthetic treatment, the occlus ion became worse in three patients: the causes of the changes for the worse were the detachment of a bonded bridge in one patient and mandibular growth in the other two.
