Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jonathan Sandler

Publications and source records attributed to Jonathan Sandler.

10 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Limiting factors in orthodontic treatment: 2. The biological limitations of orthodontic treatment.

UNLABELLED: Owing to a shortage in the orthodontic workforce in the United Kingdom, general dental practitioners carry out orthodontic treatment in selected cases. Orthodontic treatment may not always be successful due to various factors. Some of these limiting factors are related to the practitioner, others to the patients and the orthodontic appliances used. These three sets of factors were covered in the first part of this article. This second part deals with the biologic limitations of orthodontic treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: General dental practitioners and novice orthodontic practitioners may get into difficulties by embarking upon an orthodontic treatment which may not be feasible due to various limitations imposed by the underlying biology. This article provides a brief outline of these limitations.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2006

Voicing concern: an unusual sequalae of orthognathic surgery.

Contact granuloma of the vocal cords is a recognised but unusual complication of prolonged endotracheal intubation. The authors have however encountered a case of contact granuloma associated with short-term intubation of just four hours following orthognathic surgery. Here we briefly describe the orthodontic case and orthognathic surgery. We further explain the presenting symptoms and treatment undertaken for the contact granuloma.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Photographic 'Kesling set-up'.

The following report details a technique for producing a digital 'Kesling-type setup', which can give the patients an indication of how their dentition will look at the end of orthodontic treatment. High quality digital photographs of the patients' teeth are probably easier for the patients to relate to than a set of doctored plaster models.

Communication↗
PubMed2005

How to write a case report.

UNLABELLED: Case reports form an invaluable source of learning and discussion material. The aim of this article is to provide some guidance to help authors who are thinking of submitting reports for future publication. Some common pitfalls are highlighted, as well as useful hints to increase the authors' chances of publication. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Case reports often introduce readers to new clinical techniques and allow them so see how treatment can be made more efficient and effective.

Dental Records↗
PubMed2003

Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Herbst and Twin-block appliances for established Class II Division I malocclusion. The study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial carried out in orthodontic departments in the United Kingdom. A total of 215 patients (aged 11-14 years) were randomized to receive treatment with either the Herbst or the Twin-block appliance. Treatment with the Herbst appliance resulted in a lower failure-to-complete rate for the functional appliance phase of treatment (12.9%) than did treatment with Twin-block (33.6%). There were no differences in treatment time between appliances, but significantly more appointments (3) were needed for repair of the Herbst appliance than for the Twin-block. There were no differences in skeletal and dental changes between the appliances; however, the final occlusal result and skeletal discrepancy were better for girls than for boys. Because of the high cooperation rates of patients using it, the Herbst appliance could be the appliance of choice for treating adolescents with Class II Division 1 malocclusion. The trade-off for use of the Herbst is more appointments for appliance repair.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2003

Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal effects.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance for the developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion. This multicenter trial was carried out in the United Kingdom. A total of 174 children, aged 8 to 10 years old, with Class II Division 1 malocclusion were randomly allocated to receive treatment with a Twin-block appliance or to an untreated, control group. Data were collected at the start of the study and 15 months later. Results showed that early treatment with Twin-block appliances resulted in reduction of overjet, correction of molar relationships, and reduction in severity of malocclusion. Most of this correction was due to dentoalveolar change, but some was due to favorable skeletal change. Early treatment with the Twin-block appliance is effective in reducing overjet and severity of malocclusion. The small change in the skeletal relationship might not be considered clinically significant.

Age Factors↗
PubMed2003

Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 2: Psychosocial effects.

The aims of this project were to evaluate whether early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance for the developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion resulted in any psychosocial benefits. This multicenter trial was carried out in the United Kingdom, with 174 children aged 8 to 10 years with Class II Division 1 malocclusions randomly allocated to receive treatment with Twin-block appliances or to an untreated control group. Data were collected at the start of the study and 15 months later. Results showed that early treatment with Twin-block appliances resulted in an increase in self-concept and a reduction of negative social experiences. The subjects also reported treatment benefits that could be related to improved self-esteem. Further research is needed to determine the extent to which these effects translate into social behavior and experiences.

Child↗
PubMed2002

The great divide.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Educational Measurement↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Limiting factors in orthodontic treatment: 1. Factors related to patient, operator and orthodontic appliances.

UNLABELLED: Owing to a shortage in the orthodontic work force in the United Kingdom, many general dental practitioners carry out orthodontic treatment in selected cases. Orthodontic treatment may not always be successful as a result of various factors. Some of these limiting factors are related to the practitioner, others to the patient, the orthodontic appliances used and sometimes to the underlying biology. It is essential that practitioners are aware of these limitations. The aim of this two part article is to describe some of the practical aspects that need to be considered. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: General dental practitioners and novice orthodontic practitioners may get into difficulties by embarking upon an orthodontic treatment which may not be feasible owing to various limitations of orthodontic treatment.

Age Factors↗