What is the impact of the only life-and-death decision for orthodontists? Namely, to end the life of four viable teeth. It appears there is no stomach to end this amaranthine controversy, despite a century of substantial evidence. Instead, the contentiousness has increased beyond just debates regarding the application of nonextraction, 2-stage, and arch development into claims of bodily harm and even death by diminished airway associated with the removal of dental units. The result has been a rise in "alternative" treatments, supported only by clever, enthusiastic promotion, combined with relentless defamation of extraction treatments. Anecdotal examples of untoward results, punctuated by emotional claims are more common than data, logic, and a respect for reason. Consequently, Dr. Bowman will review the research (along with a bit of pop culture) as it relates to these clinically profound issues.
Learning Objectives:
After this lecture, attendees will be able to:
Relate the pros and cons of various treatment "philosophies" such as extraction, non extraction, early, and expansive in relationship to esthetics and function.
Evaluate the contemporary anecdotal concerns for treatment involving the removal of dental units related to the current state of evidence.
Explain the benefits and risks of the menagerie of orthodontic treatment options to professional, patients, parents, and the public.
