RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar o conhecimento dos profissionais da ortodontia quanto à prescrição de dentifrícios e antissépticos durante o tratamento ortodôntico. Métodos: Foi realizado um estudo observacional e descritivo exploratório de abrangência nacional com 440 ortodontistas brasileiros, baseado em cálculo amostral prévio, para avaliação da prática clínica dos ortodontistas na prescrição de dentifrícios e antissépticos. Questionários eletrônicos auto administrados foram enviados aos profissionais da Ortodontia. Os dados foram analisados por meio de tabelas de distribuição de frequência absolutas e relativas. Resultados: Verificou-se que o antisséptico bucal mais indicado (39,8%) foi o Colgate Periogard® (Colgate®) e 421 dos participantes (95,7%) conhecem o seu ingrediente ativo (digluconato de clorexidina). Além do antisséptico Colgate Periogard®, os participantes também foram questionados sobre qual o ingrediente ativo presente nos seguintes antissépticos, cujas respostas assertivas estavam na seguinte ordem %, Cepacol® (Sanofi-Aventis®) com 60,7%, Colgate Plax® (Colgate®) com 54,5% e Listerine® (Jhonson&Jhonson®) com 51,6%. Quanto ao regime terapêutico da clorexidina 63,9% indicaram assertivamente sua utilização sendo a mesma de 2 vezes ao dia durante 7 a 10 dias. O dentifrício mais indicado foi o Colgate Total 12®, sendo que 60,18% desses indivíduos indicaram corretamente seu composto ativo. Conclusão: De acordo com a metodologia empregada, pôde-se concluir que os profissionais da ortodontia conhecem e prescrevem métodos de controle químico aos pacientes durante o tratamento ortodôntico e a maioria identifica os compostos químicos ativos presentes nas fórmulas de antissépticos e dentifrícios.

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the knowledge of orthodontic professionals regarding the prescription of dentifrices and antiseptics during orthodontic treatment. Methods: An observational and descriptive exploratory study of national scope was conducted with 440 Brazilian orthodontists, based on previous sample calculations, to evaluate the clinical practice of orthodontists in prescribing dentifrices and antiseptics. Self-managed electronic questionnaires were sent to orthodontic professionals. The data were analyzed by means of absolute and relative frequency distribution tables. Results: It was verified that the most indicated mouthwash (39.8%) was Colgate Periogard® and 421 of the participants (95.7%) know its active ingredient (chlorhexidine digluconate). Besides Colgate Periogard® antiseptic, the participants were also questioned about which active ingredient present on the following antiseptics, whose assertive answers were in the following order of %, Cepacol® (Sanofi-Aventis®) with 60.7%, Colgate Plax® (Colgate®) with 54.5% and Listerine® (Jhonson&Jhonson®) with 51.6%. As for the chlorhexidine therapeutic regime, 63.9% have stated assertively its use, being this one of 2 times a day during 7 to 10 days. The most indicated tooth was Colgate Total 12®, and 60.18% of these individuals correctly indicated its active compound. Conclusion: According to the methodology employed, it could be concluded that orthodontic professionals know and prescribe methods of chemical control to patients during orthodontic treatment and most identify the active chemical compounds present in antiseptic and tooth formulas.

RESUMO Objetivo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi avaliar o conhecimento, as atitudes e os aspectos da prática clínica de ortodontistas e periodontistas, com relação às contenções ortodônticas fixas inferiores. Métodos: Os ortodontistas (n = 502) e periodontistas (n = 269) que participaram desse estudo transversal observacional receberam, por correio eletrônico, perguntas relacionadas ao tipo de contenção fixa inferior e ao acúmulo de biofilme dentário, higiene bucal e possíveis alterações no periodonto. Os dados foram submetidos aos testes Qui-Quadrado e Exato de Fisher, com nível de significância de 5%. Resultados: Tanto os ortodontistas (72,3%) quanto os periodontistas (58,7%) relataram que a contenção higiênica acumula mais biofilme dental (p< 0,05), e 64,1% dos ortodontistas e 58,7% dos periodontistas consideram que a contenção modificada pode levar a alterações periodontais (p< 0,05). Não houve diferença significativa entre os especialistas a respeito do tipo de contenção fixa inferior considerado de mais fácil higienização pelo paciente (p> 0,05), sendo que 48,6% dos profissionais escolheram a do tipo modificada. Conclusão: Na percepção dos ortodontistas e periodontistas, a contenção modificada acumula maior quantidade de biofilme dentário, podendo causar alterações periodontais.

ABSTRACT Objective: This study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and aspects of the clinical practice of orthodontists and periodontists, regarding lower fixed orthodontic retainers. Methods: The orthodontists (n=502) and periodontists (n=269) who participated in this cross-sectional observational study received, via e-mail, questions related to the type of lower fixed retainer, dental biofilm accumulation, oral hygiene, and potential periodontal changes. The data were subjected to chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests, at 5% significance level. Results: Both orthodontists (72.3%) and periodontists (58.7%) reported that hygienic retainers accumulate more dental biofilm (p< 0.05), and 64.1% of orthodontists and 58.7% of periodontists considered that modified retainers may lead to periodontal changes (p< 0.05). There was no significant difference between the dental specialties, regarding the type of lower fixed retainer considered the easiest for the patient to perform hygiene (p> 0.05), whereas 48.6% of professionals chose the modified type. Conclusion: The modified retainer accumulates a greater amount of dental biofilm and, in the perception of orthodontists and periodontists, it may cause periodontal changes.

Resumo Introdução Não há consenso sobre os efeitos imediatos e tardios da protração maxilar em pacientes com fissura lábio palatal. Objetivo avaliar a estabilidade do tratamento precoce da Classe III em pacientes com fissura labiopalatina por meio da expansão e protração maxilar. Material e método A amostra consistiu de 28 pacientes com fissura lábio palatal com (média de idade pré tratamento de 6.7±1.8) com fissura lábio palatal transforame unilateral, tratados com disjuntor maxilar e com máscara facial de Petit. Por meio de análise em telerradiografias laterais as grandezas angulares (SNA, SNB, ANB, SN.GoGn, FMA, Ângulo Z) e lineares (overjet, Co-A, Co-Gn, Nperp-A, Nperp-Pg, AO-BO) foram avaliadas, com o software Dolphin®, nos tempos: inicial (T0), após o tratamento (T1) e acompanhamento de 2 a 6 anos (T2). Os dados foram submetidos à ANOVA e teste Tukey-Kramer. A correlação entre as grandezas cefalométricas e a idade do paciente foi determinada pelo teste de Pearson. Todas as análises foram realizadas com nível de significância de 5%. Resultado SNA, ANB e AO-BO aumentaram significativamente (p<0,05) e após o período de acompanhamento voltaram a ser semelhantes às iniciais (p>0,05). O overjet aumentou significativamente após o tratamento e mesmo tendo diminuído com o tempo, ainda se apresentava maior quando comparado ao momento inicial (p<0,05). O ângulo Z apresentou melhora com o tratamento e se manteve estável no período de acompanhamento (p<0,05). Conclusão após o tratamento (disjunção associada à protração maxilar) houve melhora do padrão esquelético. No período de acompanhamento, verificou-se que essas melhoras voltaram a medidas próximas das iniciais. Houve melhora no padrão dentário e no perfil facial que se manteve no período de controle.

Abstract Introduction There is no consensus about the immediate and latte follow-up effects of maxillary protraction in cleft lip and palate patients. Objective To evaluate the stability of Class III early treatment in cleft lip and palate patients through maxillary expansion and protraction. Material and method The sample consists in three lateral cephalometric radiographs of 28 patients (mean pre-treatment age of 6.7±1.8 years) who presented cleft lip and palate and were treated with maxillary expansion and Petit facial mask. The angular (SNA, SNB, ANB, SN.GoGn, FMA, Z Angle) and linear (overjet, Co-A, Co-Gn, Nperp-A, Nperp-Pg, AO-BO) cephalometric measures were evaluated through the Dolphin® software, in three moments: T0 (initial), T1 (after treatment), and T2 (follow-up). Data were submitted to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey-Kramer test. The correlation between cephalometric measures and patient’s age was determined by Pearson’s chi-squared test. Result The SNA, ANB, and AO-BO measures increased considerably (p<0.05), and they did not present any differences compared to the initial ones after the follow-up time. The overjet measure increased (p<0.05) after treatment and, even with its decrease at the follow-up time, it was still higher than at the beginning (p<0.05). The Z angle showed improvement with treatment and remained stable at the follow-up time. Conclusion After treatment (maxillary expansion associated with protraction), there was a skeletal pattern improvement. During the follow-up period, those alterations decreased to a measure close to the beginning. There was an improvement in the dental pattern and facial profile that continued in the follow-up period.

Craniofacial dimensions influence oral functions; however, it is not known whether they are associated with function asymmetry. The objective of this study was to evaluate chewing side preference and lateral asymmetry of occlusal contact area and bite force of individuals with different craniofacial patterns. Seventy-eight dentate subjects were divided into 3 groups according to the VERT index as follows: (1) mesofacial, (2) brachyfacial and (3) dolichofacial. Chewing side preference was evaluated using jaw tracking equipment, occlusal contact area was measured by silicon registration of posterior teeth, and bite force was measured unilaterally on molar regions using 2.25 mm-thick sensors. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA on Ranks, Student's t-test, and Mann-Whitney tests at a 5% significance level. Mesofacial, brachyfacial, and dolichofacial subjects presented more occlusal contact area on the left side. Only dolichofacial subjects showed lateral asymmetry for bite force, presenting higher force on the left side. No statistically significant differences were found for chewing side preference among all groups. Within the limitations of this study, it can be concluded that craniofacial dimensions play a role in asymmetry of bite force. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01286363.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether vertical facial patterns influence maximal occlusal force (MOF), masticatory muscle electromyographic (EMG) activity, and medial mandibular flexure (MMF). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Seventy-eight dentate subjects were divided into 3 groups by Ricketts's analysis: brachyfacial, mesofacial and dolychofacial. Maximum occlusal force in the molar region was bilaterally measured with a force transducer. The electromyographic activities of the masseter and anterior temporal muscles were recorded during maximal voluntary clenching. Medial mandibular flexure was calculated by subtracting the intermolar distance of maximum opening or protrusion from the distance in the rest position. The data were analyzed using ANOVA followed by Tukey's HSD test. The significance level was set at 5%. RESULTS: Data on maximum occlusal force showed that shorter faces had higher occlusal forces (P<0.0001). Brachyfacial subjects presented higher levels of masseter electromyographic activity and medial mandibular flexure, followed by the mesofacial and dolychofacial groups. Additionally, dolychofacial subjects showed significantly lower electromyographic temporalis activities (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: Within the limitations of the study, it may be concluded that maximum occlusal force, masticatory muscle activity and medial mandibular flexure were influenced by the vertical facial pattern.

Os objetivos deste estudo foram correlacionar a performance mastigatória com trajetória mandibular durante a mastigação, assim como avaliar performance mastigatória e trajetória mandibular de indivíduos com tipos diferentes de mastigação. Setenta e oito indivíduos saudáveis e dentados foram selecionados e divididos em 2 grupos: mastigação do tipo bilateral e unilateral. Esta classificação foi estabelecida utilizando-se um cinesiógrafo durante a mastigação de um material artificial. A mastigação foi definida como unilateral quando a maioria dos ciclos mastigatórios foi realizada em um lado específico. Os mesmos traçados obtidos para a classificação do tipo de mastigação foram usados para avaliar a trajetória mandibular durante esta função, por meio dos parâmetros do movimento. A performance mastigatória foi analisada pela trituração do material artificial mencionado e um sistema de peneiras. A análise estatística foi determinada pelo método de correlação de Spearman, e pelos testes de Mann-Whitney ou T-Student com nível de significância de 5%. Não foi encontrada correlação entre performance mastigatória e os parâmetros da trajetória mandibular durante a mastigação. Indivíduos com mastigação bilateral apresentaram melhor performance mastigatória do que indivíduos com mastigação unilateral (p<0,05), contudo, os parâmetros da trajetória mandibular não foram diferentes entre os 2 tipos de mastigadores. Nos termos em que este estudo foi conduzido, pode-se concluir que os parâmetros do movimento mandibular durante a mastigação não estão relacionados com a performance mastigatória, que a presença de preferência de lado prejudica a mastigação.

The aims of this study were to correlate masticatory performance with mandibular movements during mastication, and to evaluate masticatory performance and mandibular movements of subjects with different types of mastication. Seventy-eight healthy dentate subjects were selected and divided into 2 groups: bilateral and unilateral chewers. This classification was set by using kinesiography during mastication of an artificial material. Unilateral mastication was defined as the majority of the cycles took place at one specific side. The same tracings used to define type of mastication were used to evaluate mandibular movements by means of its parameters. Masticatory performance was analyzed by comminution of the artificial material and a sieving method. Statistical analysis was performed by Spearman’s correlation method, and Mann-Whitney and Studentʼs t-test, when appropriate, at 5% significance level. No correlation was found between masticatory performance and parameters of mandibular movement during mastication. Bilateral chewers presented significantly better (p<0.05) masticatory performance than unilateral ones, however no differences in parameters of mandibular movement were found between groups. Within the limits of this study, it may be concluded that parameters of jaw movements during mastication are not related to masticatory performance, and that the presence of a preferred chewing side worsens mastication.