Determination of pretreatment and patient cooperation factors affecting treatment outcome in orthodontic treatment with premolar extraction: a retrospective cohort study
BMC Oral Health, cilt.26, sa.1, 2026 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 26 Sayı: 1
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.1186/s12903-026-08126-8
- Dergi Adı: BMC Oral Health
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Directory of Open Access Journals, Natural Science Collection (ProQuest), Biological Science Database (ProQuest), Biomedical Reference Collection: Corporate Edition (EBSCO), Health Research Premium Collection (ProQuest)
- Anahtar Kelimeler: ABO-DI, ABO-OGS, Fixed orthodontic treatment, Patient cooperation, Tooth extraction, Treatment outcome
- Hacettepe Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Background: The objective was to evaluate the outcomes of orthodontic treatment following two or four first premolar extractions using the ABO-OGS and potential influencing factors. Methods: This study included 100 patients treated with upper two-premolar extractions (TPE) (mean age: 14.7 ± 2.3) and 85 patients treated with four-premolar extractions (FPE) (mean age: 14.5 ± 3.0). Pretreatment parameters, cephalometric radiographs, and dental casts were evaluated. Patient cooperation was assessed based on regular appointment attendance, elastic use, recurrent bracket failures, and oral hygiene. Results: There were no significant differences between TPE and FPE groups in pretreatment age, case complexity according to ABO-DI, or treatment duration. Total OGS scores were comparable between the two groups; however, marginal ridges were better aligned in the TPE group (p = 0.005). In both groups, pretreatment lip properties and additional mechanical requirement were associated with the total OGS score (p < 0.05). Additionally, in the TPE group, inadequate lip-closure and curve of Spee depth affected the total OGS score, whereas U1-PP angle had an impact in the FPE group (p < 0.05). In the TPE group, patients who didn’t attend appointments regularly had higher interproximal contact scores, and those who didn’t use elastics regularly had higher total OGS and occlusal relationship scores (p < 0.05). In the FPE group, patients with recurrent bracket failures had higher total OGS, tooth alignment, and occlusal relationship scores (p < 0.05). Poor oral hygiene was associated with higher occlusal contact scores (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Pretreatment factors, including incisor proclination, lip properties, additional mechanical requirement, and patient cooperation during treatment, influenced treatment outcomes in patients treated with TPE and FPE. Trial registration: D-KA24/28.