http://hdl.handle.net/10027/1728 Sun, 19 May 2013 02:09:10 GMT 2013-05-19T02:09:10Z http://hdl.handle.net/10027/8611 Applicant selection procedures for orthodontic specialty programs in the United States: Survey of program directors Galang, Maria Therese S.; Yuan, Judy Chia-Chun; Lee, Damian J.; Sukotjo, Cortino At the 2010 American Dental Education Association (ADEA) Annual Session, the sections on orthodontics, graduate and post-graduate education sponsored a well-attended symposium on the future of post-graduate program admissions. The main issue was how to assess prospective applicants of advanced education programs in the light of pass-fail grading systems in a number of dental schools and pass-fail national dental board exam scoring. This brings about a tremendous concern, not only to the specialty program directors and faculty, but to the prospective applicants as well. © 2011 by Elsevier Masson, American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.027 Thu, 01 Dec 2011 06:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10027/8611 2011-12-01T06:00:00Z http://hdl.handle.net/10027/2152 Influence of attachments and interproximal reduction on the accuracy of canine rotation with Invisalign - A prospective clinical study. Kravitz, Neal D; Kusnoto, Budi; Agran, Brent; Viana, Grace Objective: To evaluate the influence of attachments and interproximal reduction on canines undergoing rotational movement with Invisalign. Materials and Methods: In this prospective clinical study, 53 canines (33 maxillary and 20 mandibular) were measured from the virtual TREAT models of 31 participants treated with anterior Invisalign. The pretreatment virtual model of the predicted final tooth position was superimposed on the posttreatment virtual model using ToothMeasure, Invisalign's proprietary measurement software. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) (P <.05) compared three treatment modalities: attachments only (AO), interproximal reduction only (IO), and neither attachments nor interproximal reduction (N). Student's Mests (P <.05) compared the mean accuracy of canine rotation between arches. Results: The mean accuracy of canine rotation with Invisalign was 35.8% (SD = 26.3). Statistical analyses indicated that there was no significant difference in accuracy between groups AO, IO, and N (P = .343). There was no statistically significant difference (P = .888) in rotational accuracy for maxillary and mandibular canines for any of the treatment groups. The most commonly prescribed attachment shape was the vertical-ellipsoid (70.5%). Conclusions: Vertical-ellipsoid attachments and interproximal reduction do not significantly improve the accuracy of canine rotation with the Invisalign system. Tue, 01 Jul 2008 05:00:00 GMT http://hdl.handle.net/10027/2152 2008-07-01T05:00:00Z