View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
Title Orthodontic Appointment Intervals
Clinical Question Are 4-Week Appointment Intervals More Effective In Orthodontic Treatment Than Longer Intervals?
Clinical Bottom Line According to this case series, 6-week appointment intervals can be equally effective as 4-week appointment intervals and do not appear to lengthen overall treatment time significantly. (See Comments on the CAT below)
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 3189247Alger/198892 orthodontic patients in Saudi Arabia with full upper and lower appliancesCase Series
Key resultsPatients in this study were on a 6-week recall schedule. The average treatment time for the 92 patients was 22 months. Patients requiring surgery showed the longest treatment time (30 months average), while Class I and Class II patients who did not require extraction’s showed the shortest treatment time (19.5 months average).
Evidence Search PubMed Search: "Orthodontics"[Mesh] OR "Orthodontics, Preventive"[Mesh] OR "Orthodontics, Interceptive"[Mesh] OR "Orthodontics, Corrective"[Mesh])) AND "Appointments and Schedules"[Mesh] AND "Time Factors"[Mesh]
Comments on
The Evidence
This is very old and very weak evidence. Not having a comparison between patients on different appointment schedules makes it impossible to quantify effects of longer vs. shorter appointment intervals. However, this was the most pertinent article on this specific topic.
Applicability This applies to orthodontic patients with full appliances on both arches, and specifically to orthodontists establishing their normal recall interval for patients.
Specialty/Discipline (Orthodontics)
Keywords Orthodontics; appointment interval; orthodontic adjustments; treatment time; schedule
ID# 464
Date of submission: 12/22/2009spacer
E-mail FrancisJ@uthscsa.edu
Author J. Christian Francis
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
Comments on the CAT
post a comment
by Hieu Nguyen (San Antonio, TX) on 04/12/2012
A PubMed search was conducted on April 2012. The evidence relevant to this clinical question was weak and old. The highest evidence found in this search was PMID: 3189247, which is the same one the original author of this clinical question listed.

Return to Found CATs list