Compare the Prevalence of Temporomandibular Disorders in Class II Orthodontic Patients with and without Orthosurgery

Mohammad Najafian; Susan Sadeghian; Eilnaz Ehrami; Nasim Esnaashari

doi:10.18502/ijds.v17i4.8643

Mohammad Najafian Dental Graduate Student, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
Susan Sadeghian Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
Eilnaz Ehrami Postgraduate Student, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
Nasim Esnaashari Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijds.v17i4.8643

Keywords: Temporomandibular joint disorder, Orthodontics, Orthognathic surgery.

Abstract

Introduction: Most orthodontists believe that orthodontic treatment does not cause TMD (Temporomandibular disorder), although some disagree with this. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of symptoms of temporomandibular joint disorders in class II skeletal patients in three groups with a history of orthodontic treatment, orthosurgery and no treatment

Materials and Methods: In this descriptive-analytical study, 99 adult skeletal patients of class II referred to the orthodontic department of Khorasgan in 2020 were selected. The prevalence of TMD was assessed in three subgroups: recipient of orthodontic treatment without orthosurgery, recipient of orthodontic treatment with orthosurgery treatment, and not receiving orthodontic treatment. Anamnestic and Dysfunction indices were assessed using Helkimo index and questionnaire. Data were analyzed by Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square and Fisher's exact test (p value < 0.05).

Results: There was no significant difference in the severity and prevalence of TMD in adults with class II malocclusion among the three groups when comparing the anamnestic index and dysfunction index among patients with orthodontic treatment, orthosurgery and without treatment (p value < 0.05). In the examination of TMD in adults with class II malocclusion div1 and div2 among the three groups, there was no significant difference among patients with orthodontic treatment, orthosurgery and without treatment when compared with the anamnestic index and dysfunction index (p value < 0.05).

Conclusion: Severity and prevalence of TMD in adults with Class II malocclusion were no different in the three groups.