ANGLE ORTHODONTIST安格尔正畸学家
ANGLE ORTHODONTIST(英文缩写 ANGLE ORTHOD),ISSN 0003-3219,eISSN 1945-7103,中文译名:安格尔正畸学家 是一本学术期刊。本页汇总该期刊的最新影响因子、分区信息以及最新收录于 PubMed 的文献,帮助您快速了解期刊全貌。
发文量统计区间：2025-11-01 至 2026-10-31，按本站收录文献的发表日期统计。
期刊介绍
历年影响因子趋势
| JCR 数据年份 | 影响因子 | JCR 分区 |
|---|---|---|
| 2021 | 2.684 | Q3 |
| 2022 | 3.400 | Q2 |
| 2023 | 3.000 | Q1 |
| 2024 | 3.200 | Q1 |
| 2025 | 3.700 | Q1 |
ANGLE ORTHODONTIST 最新收录文献
-
1. Treatment outcomes, efficiency and complications of customized ceramic brackets compared with conventional fixed orthodontic appliances.
PMID:日期:2026-09-11To compare treatment outcomes, efficiency, and bracket-related complications between customized ceramic brackets (LightForce) and conventional appliances. This retrospective study included 75 patients treated in a private orthodontic practice (LightForce, n = 36; conventional, n = 39). Pretreatment malocclusion severity was assessed using the American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index (ABO-DI). The primary outcome, treatment outcome quality, was assessed using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System (ABO-OGS). Secondary outcomes related to treatment efficiency and bracket-related complications were assessed by treatment duration, number of scheduled and emergency visits, and bracket failures. Between-group comparisons were conducted using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests for continuous variables and Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables. Pretreatment ABO-DI scores were comparable between groups. Total posttreatment ABO-OGS scores were similar between the LightForce and conventional groups (29.0 vs 25.0; P = .061), although marginal ridge scores were higher in the LightForce group (P < .001). LightForce treatment was completed in a shorter time (16.0 vs 19.0 months; P < .001) with fewer scheduled visits (P = .012). However, the LightForce group experienced more bracket failures and more bracket related emergency visits (both P < .001). The presence of at least one bracket failure was higher in the LightForce group (80.6% vs 43.6%; P = .002). Customized ceramic brackets (LightForce) achieved overall treatment quality comparable to conventional fixed appliances, but with improved treatment efficiency; however, they were associated with a higher rate of bracket-related complications.
-
2. In situ evaluation of oral pathogen adhesion to orthodontic bracket materials: a split-mouth design with balanced allocation.
PMID:日期:2026-09-09To evaluate the adhesion of oral pathogens to different orthodontic bracket materials using an in situ split-mouth design with balanced allocation. Three bracket materials were evaluated: (1) stainless steel, (2) monocrystalline alumina ceramic, and (3) polycarbonate plastic. Customized maxillary trays were fabricated for 10 adult participants, and the materials were systematically assigned to the incisor, canine, premolar, and molar positions according to a predetermined balanced schedule. Participants wore trays containing bracket specimens for 12 hours overnight. Each participant completed at least three sessions, yielding 20 measurements per bracket material at each tooth position. After retrieval, biofilms were detached using sonication. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was performed to assess total bacteria, Streptococcus mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Aggregatibacter actinomycetemcomitans. Repeated-measures two-way analysis of variance was used to evaluate the effects of bracket material and tooth position, and their interaction, on bacterial adhesion. Metal and plastic showed greater total bacterial adhesion than ceramic. S. mutans and S. sobrinus showed higher adhesion to ceramic than to metal and plastic, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed in the adhesion of P. gingivalis or A. actinomycetemcomitans among the materials. Tooth position had no significant effect on bacterial adhesion. Bracket material significantly influences bacterial composition during early biofilm formation, whereas tooth position has minimal effect.
-
3. During which stage does maximum expansion occur in the passive self-ligating system?
PMID:日期:2026-09-09To evaluate the stage-specific contribution of each archwire to transverse arch development in a passive self-ligating (PSL) system using multilandmark digital measurements. Twenty-one adults with mild-to-moderate crowding were treated with a PSL system using a standardized archwire sequence: 0.013-inch CuNiTi (S1), 0.014 × 0.025-inch CuNiTi (S2), 0.018 × 0.025-inch CuNiTi (S3), and 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel (S4). Transverse measurements were made at cuspal, centroid, and palatal/lingual landmarks on digital models at baseline (S0) and after each archwire stage. Pain was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS). 0.014 × 0.025-inch CuNiTi (copper-nickel-titanium) archwire (ΔS2-S1) produced the greatest single-stage expansion in both arches. In the maxillary arch, the largest increment was at the intersecond premolar cuspal width (1.81 ± 0.87 mm; P < .001), followed by interfirst premolar (1.65 ± 0.91 mm; P < .001) and intercanine (1.33 ± 0.73 mm; P < .001). In the mandibular arch, the greatest expansion was at the intercanine cuspal width (1.10 ± 0.68 mm; P < .001) and intersecond premolar (1.03 ± 0.69 mm; P = .012). Intercuspal expansion consistently exceeded centroid and palatal/lingual expansion at canine and premolar widths. 0.013-inch CuNiTi archwire elicited the highest VAS score (6.14 ± 1.62) and stainless steel the lowest (1.95 ± 1.69). The 0.014 × 0.025-inch CuNiTi archwire was the primary contributor to transverse arch development in the PSL system, producing expansion predominantly through buccal crown tipping. Stainless steel archwires contributed the least expansion and pain, while the initial archwires caused the greatest pain.
-
4. Cone beam computed tomography integration in clear aligner therapy in the treatment planning of Class II division 2 malocclusion.
PMID:日期:2026-08-13To evaluate the impact of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) integration on clear aligner therapy (CAT) digital treatment planning for maxillary incisors in patients with Class II division 2 malocclusion. Digital treatment plans were developed for patients using Spark Approver software (Ormco, Orange, CA, USA), with and without CBCT integration. Planned lingual root torque (LRT) and lingual root movement (LRM) were recorded from the tooth movement table for maxillary incisors that satisfied selection criteria. Predicted lingual dehiscence (PLD) and clinical parameters including number of aligners, prescribed interproximal reduction (IPR), and number of intermediate and challenging tooth movements were recorded. Inferential statistics were used to compare treatment plans developed with and without CBCT. 56 maxillary incisors from 18 patients were assessed. With CBCT integration, planned LRT and LRM were significantly reduced by 51.5% and 42.4%, respectively. PLD per tooth significantly decreased from 3.7 mm (SD: 3.5) without CBCT, to 0.8 mm (SD: 1.3) with CBCT. Although no significant differences were observed in the number of aligners, prescribed IPR, or planned intermediate tooth movements, significantly fewer challenging movements were planned when CBCT was utilized. CBCT integration into CAT digital treatment planning significantly alters planned root movements, minimizes PLD, and limits challenging tooth movements. Clinicians must carefully review digital treatment plans to identify and modify planned movements that may exceed anatomical limits to ensure alveolar boundaries are respected.
-
5. Oral health-related quality of life and masticatory function changes in Class II camouflage treatment: focus on maxillary premolar extraction and final posterior occlusion.
PMID:日期:2026-08-05To compare changes in oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) and subjective food intake ability (key food intake ability [KFIA]) among different Class II camouflage strategies and to assess posterior occlusal contact types in Class II molar finishing. Records from 62 patients with Class II malocclusion were categorized into nonextraction, maxillary premolar extraction (ME), and maxillomandibular premolar extraction (MME). The Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) and KFIA were administered before and after treatment. The American Board of Orthodontics Discrepancy Index and Objective Grading System (OGS) were also evaluated. The primary outcomes were group × time interactions in OHIP-14 and KFIA; the secondary outcome was posterior disclusion in ME cases. Baseline characteristics were similar, except for greater initial overjet and overbite in ME (P < .05). KFIA remained stable after treatment in all groups (P ≥ .05). OHIP-14 improved significantly in total score and psychological discomfort for all patients, with additional improvement in the handicap domain in the MME group; however, no significant group × time interactions were found. Baseline OHIP-14 was the only predictor of posttreatment OHRQoL (P < .001). OGS outcomes were comparable; however, digital analysis showed second-molar posterior disclusion in 10% of ME cases. Class II camouflage treatment improved psychosocial aspects of OHRQoL regardless of extraction pattern; in contrast, subjective masticatory function remained unchanged. Baseline OHRQoL, rather than extraction type or case complexity, predicted final OHRQoL. Posterior occlusal assessment beyond OGS criteria may be useful in ME cases.
-
6. Do clear aligners distalize maxillary molars bodily or by distal tipping? A systematic review introducing a prespecified biomechanical descriptor.
PMID:日期:2026-08-04To characterize the sagittal translation-tipping balance associated with reported maxillary molar distalization outcomes during clear aligner therapy (CAT) using a prespecified model-based descriptor. A systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261306794). PubMed, Scopus, and WOS were searched from inception to February 2026. Studies reporting maxillary molar distalization by CAT and providing crown displacement (Dcrown) and angulation change (θ) were included. A prespecified sagittal rigid-body approximation was applied. Tipping-related displacement was estimated as Dtip = Leff·tan(|θ|), where Leff was set as crown-to-center of resistance lever arm. Bodily displacement was defined as Dbod = Dcrown-Dtip. The primary outcome was the BF (Dbod/Dcrown). Descriptive analyses were performed separately for maxillary first (U6) and second (U7) molars. Twelve studies were included. Median Dcrown was 1.78 mm for U6 and 1.72 mm for U7. Median BF was 0.70 for U6 and 0.78 for U7. Using prespecified BF thresholds, translation-dominant movement was observed in 56.3% of U6 arms and 60.0% of U7 arms. Mixed behavior was observed in 37.5% of U6 arms and 26.7% of U7 arms, whereas tipping-dominant behavior occurred in 6.3% of U6 arms and 13.3% of U7 arms. Internal validation against root displacement showed that 66.7% of predictions were within 0.50 mm and 88.9% within 0.75 mm of observed apical movement. Maxillary molar distalization by CAT is more often translation-dominant than tipping-dominant; however, mixed movement patterns are common and tipping-dominant behavior can occur, particularly in U7.
-
7. Training the algorithmically augmented orthodontist: competencies, curriculum design, and implementation challenges.
PMID:日期:2026-07-29To establish a structured framework for incorporating artificial intelligence (AI) education into orthodontic residency training, outlining the competencies required for thoughtful and responsible use of AI in clinical practice. The framework was developed through a series of iterative discussions among orthodontic educators with experience in digital orthodontics and AI research. A targeted review of the literature in dentistry, medical education, and health care ethics was performed to identify recurring themes related to AI literacy, competency-based training, and clinical integration. Insights were synthesized into guiding principles, competency domains, and curricular components suitable for orthodontic residency programs. The proposed framework describes (1) key guiding principles for integrating AI into orthodontic education, including patient-centered care, evidence-based evaluation, interdisciplinary collaboration, experiential learning, professional responsibility, and adaptability; (2) a phased curriculum spanning foundational AI concepts, clinical applications, patient management, ethics, and research appraisal; and (3) core competencies with measurable objectives focused on AI literacy, clinical workflow integration, ethical and regulatory awareness, and familiarity with AI-enabled orthodontic tools. Common implementation challenges, such as faculty experience gaps, limited resources, regulatory uncertainty, and assessment variability, are also discussed, along with practical strategies to address them. Integrating AI into orthodontic education is increasingly necessary to prepare future clinicians for evolving practice environments. This framework provides a practical foundation for curriculum development and encourages broader discussion to establish shared standards for AI competencies in orthodontics.
-
8. Orthodontic-related posts on Instagram: are they evidence based?
PMID:日期:2026-07-29To determine the prevalence of orthodontic-related evidence-based posts on Instagram. A secondary aim was to assess the quality of studies cited within these orthodontic-related posts. A cross-sectional analysis of publicly available Instagram posts was conducted between April 1 and November 30, 2025. Posts were identified using eight orthodontic hashtags (#orthodontics, #orthobiomechanics, #damonbraces, #clearaligners, #invisalign, #tads, #airwayorthodontics, #myofunctionalorthodontics). The first 200 eligible posts per hashtag were included. Screening and data extraction of post characteristics was conducted in duplicate and independently. For posts citing evidence, the referenced articles were retrieved, and the study quality assessed. Descriptive statistics and frequency distributions were calculated. From 1600 posts analyzed, the content type was predominantly treatment descriptions (710/1600) and marketing (618/1600), with 187 categorized as educational. Engagement was modest (median likes: 21). Critically, only 25 posts cited any scientific evidence. Among these, narrative reviews (6/25) and epidemiological studies (5/25) were the most frequently cited study types. Of the 23 citable articles retrieved, five were rated as high quality, nine moderate quality, and nine low quality. This study confirms a lack of evidence-based orthodontic posts on Instagram. The small number of posts that cite scientific literature rely on moderate to low-quality studies. A coordinated effort among clinicians, professional societies, and online platforms is required to improve the credibility and quality of orthodontic information.
-
9. Perception of smile attractiveness with different orthodontic aligner configurations.
PMID:日期:2026-07-29To examine the esthetic perception, by laypeople, of smile attractiveness using different configurations of orthodontic aligners and their accessories. This cross-sectional study included nine standardized photographs of an adult female model presenting an esthetically pleasing smile. The images represented different clinical conditions: natural smile (without aligner or attachments), smile with aligner only, with aligners and attachments, and with aligner combined with elastics, with and without attachments. A total of 193 laypeople, all aged over 18 years, evaluated the attractiveness of each image using a five-point Likert scale. Participants also completed a social media questionnaire assessing their familiarity with aligners, attachments, and their perception of aligner esthetics. Statistical analyses were performed using Chi-square, Fisher's Exact Test, Kruskal-Wallis, analysis of variance, and Tukey's post hoc test, with a significance level set at 5% (P < .05). The highest esthetic ratings were observed for the natural smile (P = .66, mean = 4.46 ± 0.05), followed by the smile with aligner only (P = .56, mean = 4.27 ± 0.09) and the smile with attachments limited to the anterior teeth, without aligner (P = .36, mean = 4.25 ± 0.11). In contrast, images showing aligner with cuts, elastics and multiple attachments received the lowest attractiveness score (P = .09, mean = 3.38). Although 69.9% reported being familiar with aligners, only 13.9% understood what attachments were. Although 82.9% indicated they would choose aligner treatment, only 39.9% perceived them as completely invisible. Orthodontic aligners are generally considered an esthetically acceptable treatment option. Simpler configurations, without accessories or with limited anterior attachments, showed attractiveness comparable to the natural smile, whereas multiple accessories negatively affected smile perception.
-
10. Clinical comparison of different debonding techniques of clear aligner attachments: a single-center, split-mouth randomized clinical trial.
PMID:日期:2026-07-24To evaluate effectiveness of different debonding methods for aligner attachments regarding pain level, attachment removal time, and remnant adhesive amount. Thirty-two patients (13 female and 19 male; mean age: 26.0 ± 7.9 years) who underwent aligner attachment debonding were included. Attachments were debonded using two different techniques with a split-mouth design. For each patient, two diagonal quadrants were debonded with an adhesive removal plier (Plier group, n = 296), and contralateral quadrants with a 24-blade carbide bur (Bur group, n = 294). In the Plier group, a carbide bur was also used to remove remaining adhesive after debonding with pliers. Pain levels were recorded using a numeric rating scale (NRS) for anterior and posterior segments. In the Plier group, adhesive remnants were scored using adhesive remnant index. Average removal time per attachment was measured. Data were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed-rank, Mann-Whitney U, and Pearson's χ2 tests (P < .05). Removal time per attachment was slightly longer with the Bur group; however, this difference was not statistically significant. In lower posterior segments, NRS scores were significantly higher with the Bur technique (median 2.0) compared to the Plier technique (median 1.0, P = .028). After plier debonding, ARI (adhesive remnant index) score "1" was more frequent in optimized (60.8%) than conventional (43.5%) attachments (P = .004). Both debonding techniques yielded clinically similar results. The Bur technique resulted in significantly higher pain only in lower posterior segments. Adhesive removal pliers were effective for optimized and conventional attachments, usually leaving less than half of the adhesive.