Biological principles of early orthodontic intervention

Abstract

For many decades, orthodontists have debated about the best age for childrent to start orthodontic treatment. Despite the American Association of Orthodontist's recommendation that orthodontic screening should be started by age 7, many orthodontists do not treat children prior to the eruption of permanent teeth, and they postpone the treatment until the full permanent dentition at approximately age 12. Long-term benefits of early treatment is also controversial. In reviewing these controversies we find that the majority of debates circle around early or late treatment of class II malocclusion. We cant find as much controversy in many other services that can be performed for young patients during primary or mixed dentition, such as anterior and posterior cross bite, habit control, crowding, space management, eruption problems and many other services that a young and growing child can benefit from. Practitioners who are in favor of early class II treatment advocate that early intervention of class II is the best choice for growth modification when the problem is skeletal and especially due to mandibular retrognathism. On the other hand, opponents believe that there is no difference in the final result, and a single-phase treatment approach is preferable because of the advantages that accompany the reduced treatment time.