Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

Title abbreviation: Adv Clin Exp Med
JCR Impact Factor (IF) – 2.1
5-Year Impact Factor – 2.2
Scopus CiteScore – 3.4 (CiteScore Tracker 3.4)
Index Copernicus  – 161.11; MEiN – 140 pts

ISSN 1899–5276 (print)
ISSN 2451-2680 (online)
Periodicity – monthly

Download original text (EN)

Advances in Clinical and Experimental Medicine

2018, vol. 27, nr 10, October, p. 1377–1382

doi: 10.17219/acem/69976

Publication type: original article

Language: English

Download citation:

  • BIBTEX (JabRef, Mendeley)
  • RIS (Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero)

The best time for orthodontic treatment for Polish children based on skeletal age analysis in accordance to refund policy of the Polish National Health Fund (NFZ)

Rafał Flieger1,A,B,C,D, Jacek Matys2,3,C,D,E,F, Marzena Dominiak4,E,F

1 Private Dental Practice, Kościan, Poland

2 Phd Student, Department of Oral Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland

3 Private Dental Practice, Wschowa, Poland

4 Department of Oral Surgery, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland


Background. The ability to estimate the growth potential correctly is an important factor in taking effective actions with respect to orthodontic diagnosis, suitable treatment protocol and optimal timing of commencing the therapy.
Objectives. The aim of this study was to compare skeletal maturity between the groups depending on the malocclusion as well as to define the optimal timing for particular orthodontic treatment procedures in children with miscellaneous types of malocclusion and compare it with the duration of treatment proposed by the National Health Fund (NFZ).
Material and Methods. The delivery of the objectives of this study has been divided into 4 stages: the selection of the lateral head films (n = 180) of patients with malocclusion without congenital defect – diagnosing an orthodontic defect using Angle’s classification, noting the chronological age (7–16 years) at the moment of taking the radiograph; the evaluation of the patients’ skeletal maturation stages determined by the cervical vertebrae; comparison of the skeletal maturity between the groups considering the calendar age and the type of malocclusion and analysis of 45 cephalometric RTG projections of patients with different malocclusions.
Results. The average age for children with malocclusion was significantly higher for class III as compared to class II or I in pubertal peak group (CS3 and CS4), and for class III as compared to class I or II after the puberty peak (CS5 and CS6). Our findings of the average age according to Angle’s classification revealed significant differences between class II and class III at CS2, CS3, CS4, CS5, between class I and class III at CS3 and CS5, between class I and class II at CS4, between class III and I at CS5, and between all classes at CS6 maturity stage.
Conclusion. Based on our research, it is concluded that the time of the refund of orthodontic treatment in Poland should be extended to 13.6 years of age for class II malocclusion and to 14.7 years of age for class III defects.

Key words

orthodontic treatment, malocclusion, Angle’s classification, skeletal age, cervical vertebral maturation method

References (16)

  1. Sato K, Mito T, Mitani H. An accurate method of predicting mandibular growth potential based on bone maturity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;120:286–293.
  2. Sato K, Mito T, Mitani H. Predicting mandibular growth potential with cervical vertebral bone age. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124:173–177.
  3. Franchi L, Baccetti T, De Toffol L, Polimeni A, Cozzad P. Phases of the dentition for the assessment of skeletal maturity: A diagnostic performance study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133:395–400.
  4. Uysal T, Ramoglu SI, Basciftci FA, Saric Z. Chronologic age and skeletal maturation of the cervical vertebrae and hand-wrist: Is there a relationship? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:622–628.
  5. Warmeling D, Rodrigues KM, Zastrow MD, Thiesen G. Skeletal maturation evaluation indexes. Odonto Cienc. 2010;25:188–193.
  6. Lai HH, Chang ZC, Yao CC, et al. Relationship between age at menarche and skeletal maturation stages in Taiwanese female orthodontic patients. Form Med Assoc. 2008;107:527–532.
  7. Chen J, Hu H, Guo J, et al. Correlation between dental maturity and cervical vertebral maturity. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;110:777–783.
  8. Gupta KP, Garg S, Grewal PS. Establishing a diagnostic tool for assessing optimal treatment timing in Indian children with developing malocclusions. Clin Exp Dent. 2011;3(1):18–24.
  9. Flieger R, Kopczyńki P, Matthews-Brzozowska T. Analysis of skeletal maturity of children with cleft palate in terms on healthy children by the CVM method. Adv Clin Exp Med. 2015;24:99–102.
  10. Chen F, Terada K, Hanada K. A new method of predicting mandibular length increment on the basis of cervical vertebrae. Angle Orthod. 2004;74:630–634.
  11. Chen F, Terada K, Hanada K. A special method of predicting mandibular growth potential for class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:191–195.
  12. Kuc-Michalska M, Baccetti T. Duration of the pubertal peak in skeletal class I and class III subjects. Angle Orthod. 2010;80:54–57.
  13. Almeida MR, Almeida RR, Navarro PVPO, Conti ACCF, Navarro RL, Camacho JGDD. Early treatment of class III malocclusion: 10-year clinical follow-up. J Appl Oral Sci. 2011;19:431–439.
  14. Tausche E, Luck O, Harzer W. Prevalence of malocclusions in the early mixed dentition and orthodontic treatment need. Eur J Orthod. 2004;26:237–241.
  15. Baccetti T. Malocclusions de classe II: Bien choisir le moment du traitement pour optimiser l’effet orthopédique des appareils fonctionnels. Orthod Fr. 2010;81:279–286.
  16. Klimas Z, Nawotczyński M, Flieger R. The diagnostics of skeletal maturation in children with standard occlusion and children with hypodontia [in Polish]. Now Lek. 2010;79:163–166.