OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to compare the malocclusion indices KIG (Kieferorthopädische Indikationsgruppen, Orthodontic Indication Groups), ICON (Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need), and mIOTN (modified Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need) regarding differences in malocclusion prevalence and their assessment of orthodontic treatment need in German 8‑ to 9‑year-old children of the Sixth German Oral Health Study (Deutsche Mundgesundheitsstudie, DMS 6).
METHODS: The necessary data for the calculation of the KIG, mIOTN, and ICON were collected by a dentist as part of a clinical orthodontic examination during the field phase of the DMS 6 and by a subsequent digital orthodontic model-analytical evaluation of intraoral scans of the dental arches and the occlusal situation in habitual occlusion.
RESULTS: Prevalence, severity, and treatment need of tooth and jaw misalignments differed in part considerably depending on the index used for assessment. On the other hand, there were several outcomes which yielded quite similar results for the different indices used, such as orthodontic treatment need, which ranged from 40.4% (KIG) over 41.6% (ICON) to 44.2% (mIOTN). Interestingly, orthodontic treatment need for the individual subject could differ considerably, when assessed using different indices.
CONCLUSIONS: In general, the results show that the mIOTN is much more conservative in assessing malocclusion prevalences often being smaller than those derived by KIG or ICON. In contrast, KIG and ICON often yield similar prevalences with certain distinct differences due to discrepancies in the respective definitions and also clearly differentiate between treatment possibility and arbitrarily determined treatment need.
UNASSIGNED: ZIEL: Das Ziel der vorliegenden Studie war es, die Indizes KIG (Kieferorthopädische Indikationsgruppen), ICON (Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need) und mIOTN (modifizierter Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need) hinsichtlich Unterschieden in der Malokklusionsprävalenz und deren Einschätzung des kieferorthopädischen Behandlungsbedarfs bei deutschen 8‑ bis 9‑jährigen Kindern der Sechsten Deutschen Mundgesundheitsstudie (DMS 6) zu vergleichen.
METHODS: Die notwendigen Daten zur Berechnung von KIG, mIOTN und ICON wurden von einem Zahnarzt im Rahmen einer klinisch-kieferorthopädischen Untersuchung während der Feldphase der DMS 6 und durch eine anschließende digitale kieferorthopädische modellanalytische Auswertung von Intraoralscans der Zahnbögen und der okklusalen Situation in habitueller Okklusion erhoben.
UNASSIGNED: Prävalenz, Schweregrad und Behandlungsbedarf von Zahn- und Kieferfehlstellungen unterschieden sich je nach dem zur Bewertung herangezogenen Index zum Teil erheblich. Andererseits gab es mehrere Endpunkte, die für die verschiedenen verwendeten Indizes recht ähnliche Ergebnisse lieferten, wie etwa der kieferorthopädische Behandlungsbedarf, der von 40,4 % (KIG) über 41,6 % (ICON) bis 44,2 % (mIOTN) reichte. Interessanterweise konnte der kieferorthopädische Behandlungsbedarf des einzelnen Probanden erheblich variieren, wenn er anhand verschiedener Indizes bewertet wurde.
UNASSIGNED: Im Allgemeinen zeigen die Ergebnisse, dass der mIOTN beim Assessment der Malokklusionsprävalenzen deutlich konservativer ist, sie waren oft geringer als beim Assessment mit KIG bzw. ICON. Dagegen ergeben sich nach KIG und ICON oft ähnliche Prävalenzen mit gewissen deutlichen Unterschieden aufgrund von Diskrepanzen in den jeweiligen Definitionen. KIG und ICON differenzieren auch klar zwischen Behandlungsmöglichkeit und willkürlich festgestelltem Behandlungsbedarf.

BACKGROUND: The aims were: evaluation of the correlation between the Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) and Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need (ICON); the assessment of orthodontic treatment need for schoolchildren in a population with two indices, separately for schoolchildren with mixed and permanent dentition; the estimation of the population share that could not receive orthodontic treatment because of the presence of caries and/or gingivitis.
METHODS: A total of 2652 Zagreb school children (7 - 19 years old, 52.4% of them were females) completed a questionnaire regarding previous orthodontic treatment and the type of appliance used. Their oral cavity was also inspected. The DAI and ICON indices were used for the assessment of malocclusion prevalence.
RESULTS: The subjects with mixed dentition had a greater need for orthodontic treatment, when compared to subjects with permanent dentition, when using the DAI index (p<0.001). When using the ICON index, 11.7% of subjects with mixed dentition had very severe malocclusion, as opposed to 5.8% of subjects with permanent dentition. The DAI and ICON scores correlated positively linearly (r=0.521; p<0.001). A higher prevalence of both gingivitis and caries was recorded more often in boys; caries more often in the group with the mixed dentition, and gingivitis in the group with permanent dentition (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The DAI and ICON indices have moderate agreement in assessment of malocclusion severity scores. One third of all schoolchildren with various degrees of both ICON and DAI indices have gingivitis, and half of them have caries.
UNASSIGNED: Cilji študije so: vrednotenje korelacije med indeksom estetskega videza zob (Dental Aesthetic Index, DAI) in indeksom zahtevnosti, izida in potrebe (Index of Complexity, Outcome and Need, ICON); vrednotenje potrebe po ortodontskem zdravljenju v populaciji šoloobveznih otrok z obema indeksoma, posamezna obravnava pri šoloobveznih otrocih z menjalnim in stalnim zobovjem; določanje deleža prebivalstva, ki ni prejela ortodontskega zdravljenja zaradi prisotnosti kariesa in/ali gingivitisa.
METHODS: 2.552 učencev iz Zagreba (od 7. do 19. leta; od tega 52,4 % učenk) je izpolnilo vprašalnik o njihovem prejšnjem ortodontskem zdravljenju in vrsti zdravljenja, temu je sledil pregled ustne votline. Za vrednotenje razširjenosti malokluzije sta se uporabila indeksa DAI in ICON.
UNASSIGNED: Učenci z menjalnim zobovjem imajo večjo potrebo po ortodontskem zdravljenju v primerjavi z učenci s stalnim zobovjem pri uporabi indeksa DAI (p<0,001). Pri uporabi indeksa ICON je imelo 11,7 % učencev z menjalnim zobovjem zelo resno in resno malokluzijo, učenci s stalnim zobovjem pa je 5,8 %. Rezultati indeksov DAI in ICON so medsebojno povezani pozitivno in linearno (r = 0,521; p < 0,001). Večja razširjenost gingivitisa in kariesa je zabeležena pogosteje pri fantih, karies pa bolj pogosto v skupini z menjalnim zobovjem, gingivitis pa v skupini s stalnim zobovjem (p < 0,05).
UNASSIGNED: Indeksa DAI in ICON se zmerno ujemata pri rezultatih vrednotenja resnosti malokluzije. Glede na različne stopnje indeksov DAI in ICON ima ena tretjina šoloobveznih otrok gingivitis, polovica pa karies.

BACKGROUND: With the advent of functional appliances and orthopedic appliances the elimination and correction of skeletal and dental discrepancies has been much reduced. Most orthodontists agree that elimination of oral habits and orthopaedic treatment of class 3 malocclusion and posterior cross bites deserve treatment at an early age. Early treatment was proposed along the lines of \"catch them in the young\", and \"you see it, you treat it\" is the main ideology of Early Orthodonticc Treatment (EOT). Furthermore, the majority of children have habits driving the malocclusion. Mouth breathing, tongue thrusting and incorrect swallowing patterns are all known causes of malocclusion and poor facial growth.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of dental feature that might result in malocclusion and need for early orthodontic treatment.
METHODS: Groups of 532 school going children were selected and complete case history was taken and were categorized based on the type of malocclusions, dental features that can predetermine need for early orthodontic treatment. Statistical analysis used.
RESULTS: The results shows the increase in prevalence of malocclusion and the dental features that gives clues for an orthodontist to frame up his treatment modalities not just for corrective orthodontics but for also preventive and interceptive orthodontics.
CONCLUSIONS: Angle\'s Class I malocclusion is most commonly seen malocclusion followed by class II division 1 malocclusion followed by Angles class II division 2 malocclusion. In angle\'s class I malocclusion, incidence of crowding is more followed by proclination of anterior teeth. There is no significant difference between incidence of malocclusion in males and females. The children who needed immediate orthodontic care were more than the children who doesn\'t need an orthodontic treatment. Need for increase of awareness programs is required in order to educate the people about the early orthodontic treatment.