Journal of South Asian Association of Pediatric Dentistry

Register      Login

VOLUME 7 , ISSUE 2 ( May-August, 2024 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Assessment of the Reliability of Mixed Dentition Analysis on Adolescents of Tamil Nadu: A Cross-sectional Study

Saravanan Ramasamy, Mohan Narayanan, Sridevi Jaganathan, Udhya Jaganathan, Preethi Jeyaraman

Keywords : Arch analysis, Mixed dentition analysis, Moyer's mixed dentition analysis, Reliability

Citation Information : Ramasamy S, Narayanan M, Jaganathan S, Jaganathan U, Jeyaraman P. Assessment of the Reliability of Mixed Dentition Analysis on Adolescents of Tamil Nadu: A Cross-sectional Study. J South Asian Assoc Pediatr Dent 2024; 7 (2):77-82.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10077-3304

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 06-09-2024

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2024; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim: This research aims to assess the reliability of various mixed dentition analyzes among the adolescents of Tamil Nadu and to devise a new regression equation by comparing the current mixed dentition analyzes. Settings and design: About 900 adolescents (13–18 years of age) were selected from the state of Tamil Nadu using stratified multistage sampling. Materials and methods: On the stone casts, the maximum mesiodistal width of permanent lower incisors, canines, premolars, and first permanent molars were measured. The measured values were analyzed and compared with existing mixed dentition analysis methods. Statistical analysis: Descriptive statistics were performed, and Pearson's correlation coefficient analysis was done. The p-value is kept at p < 0.05. Results: The teeth widths show sexual dimorphism and were larger in males than females. Moyer's (21.3 ± 0.6), Legovic's (21.1 ± 0.6), and Bachmann's (20.6 ± 0.6) methods significantly predicted the actual width (21.9 ± 1.3) in maxilla, whereas Moyer's (20.3 ± 0.5), Gross and Hussund's (21.0 ± 0.6), and Tanaka and Johnston's (20.3 ± 0.7) methods significantly predicted the actual width (20.3 ± 1.0) in mandible. Though these methods significantly predicted, they either overestimated or underestimated in the majority of cases. Hence, a regression equation was developed based on the results of the study. Conclusion: The basis of various mixed dentition analysis methods is the mesiodistal width of the teeth which is subjected to variability due to racial and ethnic factors. Therefore, the reliability of these analyzes should be analyzed in different racial groups. The regression equation developed in the study though holds good for a small set of samples, it should be tested on a large-scale for its reliability and accuracy.


PDF Share
  1. Rajbhoj AA, Parchake P, Begnoni G, et al. Dental changes in humans with untreated normal occlusion throughout lifetime: a systematic scoping review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2021;160(3):340.e3–362.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.02.014
  2. Chandna A, Gupta A, Pradhan KL, et al. Prediction of the size of unerupted canines and premolars in a North Indian population - an in vitro study. J Indian Dent Assoc 2011;5:329–333.
  3. Staley RN, Kerber RE. A revision of the Hixon and Oldfather mixed-dentition prediction method. Am J Orthod 1980;78(3):296–302. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(80)90274-2
  4. 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(10):762–775. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(49)90148-7
  5. Ballard ML, Wylie WL. Mixed dentition analysis-estimating size of unerupted permanent teeth. Am J Orthod 1947;33(11):754–759. DOI: 10.1016/s0096-6347(47)90073-2
  6. Moyers RE. Analysis of the dentition and occlusion. Handbook of orthodontics. 1988.
  7. Tanaka MM, Johnston LE. The prediction of the size of unerupted canines and premolars in a contemporary orthodontic population. J Am Dent Assoc 1974:88(4):798–801.
  8. Dasgupta B, Zahir S. Comparison of two non-radiographic techniques of mixed dentition space analysis and evaluation of their reliability for Bengali population. Contemp Clin Dent 2012;3(Suppl 2):S146–S150. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.101069
  9. Sholapurmath SM, Benni DB, Mandroli P. Applicability of two mixed dentition analysis in children of Jangam community of Belgaumcity. World J Dent 2012;3(4):324–329. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1183
  10. Bailit HL. Dental variation among populations. Dent Clin North Am 1975;19(1):12539.
  11. Legovic M, Novosel A, Legovic A. Regression equations for determining mesio-distal crown diameters of canines and premolars: Angle Orthod 2003;73(3):314–318. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2003)073<0314:REFDMC>2.0.CO;2
  12. Bachmann S. Voraussage des Platzbedarfs in den Stützzonenmittels multipler Regressions gleichungen. Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 1986;47(1):79–86. DOI: 10.1007/BF02167599
  13. Gross A, Hasund A. Neuere vergleichende korrelations statistische Unterschungen zur Vorhersage des Platzbedarfs in den Stutzzonendurch multiple Regressions gleichungen. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1989;50(2):109–117. DOI: 10.1007/BF02203067
  14. Trankmann J, Mohrmann G, Themm P. Vergleichende Untersuchungen der Stutzzonenprognose. Fortschr Kiefer Orthop 1990;51(3):189–194. DOI: 10.1007/BF02164570
  15. Lavelle CL. Secular trends in different racial groups. Angle Orthod 1972;42(1):19–25. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1972)042<0019:STIDRG>2.0.CO;2
  16. Singh M, Nanda RS. Prediction of tooth size and its clinical application. J Indian Dent Assoc 1972;44(5):95–98.
  17. Staley RN, Hoag JF. Prediction of the mesiodistal widths of maxillary permanent canines and premolars. Am J Orthod 1978;73(2):169–177. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(78)90187-2
  18. Grover N, Saha S, Tripathi AM, et al. Applicability of different mixed dentition analysis in Lucknow population. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2017;35(1):68–74. DOI: 10.4103/0970-4388.199220
  19. Ravinthar K, Gurunathan D. Applicability of different mixed dentition analyses among children aged 11-13 years in Chennai population. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2020;13(2):163–166. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10005-1736
  20. Baheti K, Babaji P, Ali MJ, et al. Evaluation of Moyer's mixed dentition space analysis in Indian children. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2016;6(5):453–458. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.184037
  21. Doda A, Saraf BG, Indushekhar KR, et al. Evaluation and applicability of Tanaka–Johnston and Moyers’ mixed dentition analysis for North Indian population. World J Dent 2021;12(1):57–63. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1819
  22. Bhatnagar A, Jindal MK, Khan SY. Comparison of two different non-radiographic mixed dentition analysis. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada. 2019;19:e4374.9. DOI: 10.4034/PBOCI.2019.191.59
  23. Kakkar A, Verma KG, Jusuja P, et al. Applicability of Tanaka–Johnston, Moyers and Bernabé and Flores–Mir mixed dentition analyses in school-going children of Sri Ganganagar City, Rajasthan (India): a cross-sectional study. Contemp Clin Dent 2019;10(3):410–416. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_654_18
  24. Kommineni NK, Reddy CV, Chandra NS, et al. Mixed dentition analysis - applicability of two non-radiographic methods for Chennai school children. JISPCD 2014;4(2):133–138. DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.139847
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.