Effect of Deep Overbite and Curve of Spee on Wits Appraisal with Bisecting and Functional Occlusal Planes
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Wits appraisal depends on the selected occlusal plane, potentially affecting its interpretation across different occlusal characteristics. Objective: To compare Wits measurements obtained using functional and bisecting occlusal planes in patients with normal versus deep overbite and accentuated curve of Spee. Methods: This comparative cross-sectional study at Bolan Medical College, Quetta, included 100 orthodontic patients aged 13–25 years with Class I molar relationships. Group A comprised 50 patients with overbite ≤3 mm and curve of Spee ≤2 mm; Group B comprised 50 with overbite >3 mm and curve of Spee >2 mm. Pretreatment cephalograms and dental casts provided measurements. Between-group comparisons used Welch’s t-test; within-group comparisons used paired t-tests. Results: Mean Wits-FOP was −1.1 ± 1.2 mm in Group A and −3.9 ± 1.5 mm in Group B; the between-group difference was −2.80 mm (95% CI, −3.34 to −2.26). Corresponding Wits-BOP values were −0.8 ± 1.1 and −2.2 ± 1.3 mm, with a difference of −1.40 mm (95% CI, −1.88 to −0.92); both p < 0.001. Paired FOP–BOP differences were −0.30 mm in Group A (p = 0.210) and −1.70 mm in Group B (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Wits values differed by combined occlusal phenotype and plane construction, without establishing superior diagnostic accuracy or reliability
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
1. Jacobson A. The "Wits" appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod. 1975;67(2):125-38.
2. Ghosh J, Nanda RS. Evaluation of an improved cephalometric analysis for the diagnosis of sagittal and vertical discrepancies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996;110(3):252-8.
3. Bishara SE, Fahl JA, Peterson LC. Longitudinal changes in the ANB angle and Wits appraisal: clinical implications. Am J Orthod. 1983;84(2):133-9.
4. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 6th ed. Elsevier; 2018.Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod. 1953;39(10):729-55.
5. Downing KJ, Nanda R. The effect of early functional appliance therapy on curve of Spee. Angle Orthod. 1998;68(2):123-8.
6. Ferrazzini G. Critical evaluation of the curve of Spee. Angle Orthod. 1976;46(2):202-6.
7. Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod. 1972;62(3):296-309.
8. McNamara JA Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod. 1984;86(6):449-69.
9. Braun S, Hnat WP, Johnson BE. The curve of Spee revisited. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996;110(2):206-10.
10. Ricketts RM. Cephalometric synthesis. Am J Orthod. 1960;46(9):647-73.
11. Burstone CJ. Diagnosis and treatment planning of patients with asymmetries. Semin Orthod. 1998;4(3):153-64.
12. Roth RH. Functional occlusion for the orthodontist. J Clin Orthod. 1981;15(1):32-51.
13. Nanda R. Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics. Elsevier; 2005.Sakuda M, Kuroda T, Wada K. Changes in occlusal plane during orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 1978;74(5):539-48.
14. Haynes S. The curve of Spee and orthodontic treatment. J Clin Orthod. 1978;12(5):351-6.
15. Xu TM, Liu Y, Yang MZ. Comparison of occlusal planes in different malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2004;74(6):784-9.
16. Watanabe K, Kuroda T. The effect of occlusal plane inclination on Wits appraisal. J Oral Rehabil. 1999;26(12):1002-6.
17. Cooke MS, Wei SH. The reproducibility of natural head posture: a methodological study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988;93(4):280-8.
18. Al-Khateeb SN, Al-Khateeb LT. Ancephalometric evaluation of the sagittal skeletal discrepancy in Class II subjects. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(2):234-8.