Orthodontists, general practitioners use Invisalign differently

Significant differences exist in the use of Invisalign (Align Technology) between orthodontists and general practitioners, according to a new study (Angle Orthodontist, May 2010, Vol. 80:3, pp. 425-434).

A professor from the State University of New York at the Stony Brook School of Dental Medicine and his colleague mailed a 25-question survey to all Invisalign providers within a 35-mile radius of the university.

They sent out a total of 406 questionnaires, 284 to general practitioners and 122 to orthodontists. The questionnaire was divided into four sections: background information, Invisalign experience, initial certification, and case selection.

Of the 406 questionnaires mailed, 160 were returned, for a total response rate of 39%. The response rate was 55% for orthodontists and 33% for general practitioners.

Among the study's findings:

  • Over the last 12 months before the survey was conducted, general practitioners started more Invisalign cases than orthodontists.
  • Orthodontists have started and completed more Invisalign cases than have general practitioners.
  • For both groups, the longer practitioners were certified in Invisalign, the fewer cases they started over the last 12 months.
  • Most orthodontists and general practitioners agree that mild Class I malocclusions were considered good cases to treat by less experienced Invisalign providers.
  • A significant difference in opinion was noted between practitioners as to what level of experience an Invisalign provider should have before treating a Class I malocclusion with a large midline diastema, or whether a Class II subdivision case should be treated with Invisalign.

"For orthodontists and general practitioners, an inverse relationship was noted in the percentage of cases started in the last 12 months before the survey was conducted and years certified with Invisalign," the authors noted. "It may be that the novelty of this technique has diminished, and that its limitations relative to fixed appliance treatment are beginning to discourage practitioners from using it as much as they originally did."

Copyright © 2010 DrBicuspid.com

Page 1 of 107
Next Page