Clinical and Investigative Orthodontics (Jul 2024)

Knowledge differences between general practitioners and orthodontists about Invisalign clear aligner treatment – a cross-sectional survey-based study

  • Montaha Alsultan,
  • Jana Nasser Alqefari,
  • Nabeel Almotairy

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/27705781.2024.2366747
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 83, no. 3
pp. 106 – 111

Abstract

Read online

Purpose This study investigated the knowledge differences between general practitioners and orthodontists about the Invisalign system.Materials and methods A web-based survey regarding 10 Invisalign treatment domains was distributed to 161 orthodontists and 213 general practitioners. The responses were ranked using a Likert-type scale and analysed with the Chi-square test and Bonferroni adjustment.Results The response rate was 52.1% for general practitioners and 63.4% for orthodontists. Comparing Invisalign to conventional fixed appliances, orthodontists agreed/strongly agreed that Invisalign aligners are suitable for all types of cases (p = 0.001). Orthodontists also agreed that it causes less tooth discomfort (p = 0.01) and an increased number of attachments can affect its esthetic perception (p = 0.014) but general practitioners opted for the ‘Do Not Know’ option (p ≤ 0.01). General practitioners also responded ‘Do Not Know’ to whether Invisalign treatment finishes in a shorter duration (p = 0.001), achieves all types of tooth movement (p < 0.001) and results in better periodontal health (p = 0.001). Orthodontists were more likely to disagree/strongly disagree that Invisalign treatment results in less tooth root resorption (p = 0.008), better American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System and Peer Assessment Rating scores (p < 0.001) and low risk of relapse (p < 0.001), while general practitioners opted for the ‘Do Not Know’ option (p < 0.0001, p < 0.0001 and p < 0.0001, respectively).Conclusion Regarding Invisalign treatment, this study found that orthodontists were generally evidenced-based but general practitioners lacked such knowledge, suggesting that general practitioners must be provided with relevant evidenced-based information.

Keywords