Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 May;81(3):383-8.
doi: 10.2319/071810-413.1. Epub 2011 Jan 24.

Clinical outcomes for patients finished with the SureSmile™ method compared with conventional fixed orthodontic therapy

Timothy J Alford  1 , W Eugene Roberts, James K Hartsfield Jr, George J Eckert, Ronald J Snyder
Affiliations

Clinical outcomes for patients finished with the SureSmile™ method compared with conventional fixed orthodontic therapy

Timothy J Alford et al. Angle Orthod. 2011 May.

Abstract

Objective: Utilize American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) cast/radiographic evaluation (CRE) to compare a series of 63 consecutive patients, finished with manual wire bending (conventional) treatment, vs a subsequent series of 69 consecutive patients, finished by the same orthodontist using the SureSmile™ (SS) method.

Materials and methods: Records of 132 nonextraction patients were scored by a calibrated examiner blinded to treatment mode. Age and discrepancy index (DI) between groups were compared by t-tests. A chi-square test was used to compare for differences in sex and whether the patient was treated using braces only (no orthopedic correction). Analysis of covariance tested for differences in CRE outcomes and treatment times, with sex and DI included as covariates. A logarithmic transformation of CRE outcomes and treatment times was used because their distributions were skewed. Significance was defined as P < .05.

Results: Compared with conventional finishing, SS patients had significantly lower DI scores, less treatment time (∼7 months), and better CRE scores for first-order alignment-rotation and interproximal space closure; however, second-order root angulation (RA) was inferior.

Conclusion: SS patients were treated in less time to better CRE scores for first-order rotation (AR) and interproximal space closure (IC) but on the average, malocclusions were less complex and second order root alignment was inferior, compared with patients finished with manual wire bending.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
DI scores for patients finished with SureSmile and conventional orthodontics methods (mean ± SE).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Final alignment scores via ABO cast/radiograph evaluation (CRE) for patients finished with SureSmile and conventional orthodontics methods (mean ± SE).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Total treatment (Tx) time for each group was subdivided into Tx time in braces (fixed appliances on the teeth) and Tx time in braces only (no orthopedic Tx) (mean ± SE).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Final alignment scores, determined by ABO cast/radiograph evaluation (CRE), were subdivided into each of the eight components as defined in Table 1 (mean ± SE).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Mah J, Sachdeva R. Computer-assisted orthodontic treatment: the SureSmile® process. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;120:85–87. - PubMed
    1. Sachdeva R. SureSmile® technology in a patient-centered orthodontic practice. J Clin Orthod. 2001;35:245–253. - PubMed
    1. Sachdeva R, Fruge J. F, Fruge A. M, et al. SureSmile®: a report of clinical findings. J Clin Orthod. 2005;39:297–314. - PubMed
    1. Moles R. Interview by Dr. Redmond: the SureSmile® system in orthodontic practice. J Clin Orthod. 2009;43:161–174. - PubMed
    1. Casko J. S, Vaden J. L, Kokich V. G, Damone J, James R. D, Riolo M. L, Owens S. E, Bills E. D. Objective grading system for dental casts and panoramic radiographs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114:589–599. - PubMed