Here you will find everything related to cephalometric analysis, digital radiography, Dental imaging basically everything ceph-related.

Common Psychological Aspects of Orthodontic Treatment -The Child, Adolescent and Adult Patient

  1. CephX | AI Driven Dental Services
/in Blog

As we all know, orthodontics is a long-term partnership. Psychological factors influence the choice of an orthodontist. Aside from protracted full mouth rehabilitation, most general and specialty dental procedures are done “to” the patient in a brief time and “as needed” rather than “with” the patient over a span of years.

This is not to say that non-orthodontic dental patients do not establish long term relationships with their dentists. Orthodontic-patient relationships necessarily have certain “dental” commonalities with non-orthodontic-patient relationships, but the difference lies mostly in long term related objectives with a resulting set of unique patient-practitioner psychological mindsets.

Basic Orthodontic Patient Psychology

Although it probably seems obvious to the average layman, numerous scientific studies have been undertaken that do confirm poor facial esthetics is related to:

  • Low self-esteem.
  • Problematic social activities/interactions.
  • Adverse occupational outcomes.

That being true, it is not at all hard to appreciate that the main reason for the majority of orthodontic patients and parents to seek orthodontic treatment regardless of age is found to be the attainment (or improvement) of an attractive dental-facial relationship.

Basic motivational factors are influenced by:

  • Social Environment.
  • Gender
  • Economic status
  • Behavioral traits
  • Personal issues

Basic motivational factors are influenced by:

Unless severe, functional issues of malocclusion having possible deleterious dental consequences often go unnoticed by individuals or parents. Even when apprised of functional issues, many patients or parents may not typically consider them enough of a key motivating factor(s) for the time and expense of undergoing treatment.

The Adult Patient

In the not so distant past, orthodontic treatment for adults was somewhat of a rarity.

Some of the past psychological and societal barriers to adult treatment included:

  • “Braces are only for kids and teenagers”
  • Occupational considerations
  • Affordability
  • Considered a “vanity”
  • Appearance of metal braces

In contrast, it is estimated today that 1 in 5 patients in a typical orthodontic practice are adults with some practices reporting an adult patient level nearing 50 percent.

The advent of lingual braces and “invisible” dental aligners along with changing societal norms have allowed adults to overcome some of the psychological and societal prohibitions of appearing in public as an adult with a “full metal jacket” of traditional “old school” braces.

The Adolescent Patient

Adolescent psychology has long been a subject of interest to orthodontists. Like parents, it comes as somewhat of a surprise to them to see a relatively happy “well-adjusted” child patient gradually morph into a “whatever” teenager.

Up until the past 20 or so years, a common general layman’s perception was that of teenagers fearing the prospect of hearing the dreaded parental phrase, “You need braces!”. Visions of metal mouth teenagers being teased by their peers was a daunting prospect to both patient and parent. And there was and still is some truth to those characterizations even with modern orthodontic innovations.

Thankfully, psychological and societal norms have changed and rather than being a social detriment, wearing braces as a teenager has become an accepted norm. In fact, it is known through numerous social psychology and health science studies that peer pressure, rather than being a psychological barrier because of teasing etc., has now become one of the most powerful incentives and motivational factors leading teenagers to seek orthodontic treatment. Wearing braces has gone from just a means for improving facial esthetics to a positive social incentive with the extra bonus of now being an “in” thing.

Technical improvements have also made orthodontic treatment more psychologically acceptable for adolescents with the innovation of teen version dental aligners, clear brackets and the elimination of metal bands. There is also a current trend to make wearing more visible braces a fashion or personal statement with the introduction of various colored rubber bands, different shaped colored brackets, etc.

The Child Patient

Typically, child patients take their motivation for orthodontic treatment from their parents although that is not to say that some children do express concerns about the “crookedness” of their teeth. In the clear majority of cases, the mother is the parent that takes the lead in seeking consultation and treatment.

As with teenagers, the social stigma of the past regarding the wearing of braces among younger children has greatly decreased. One significant difference with the child patient is that peer pressure although a factor, does not seem to be a prime motivating social factor to the same degree as it is in adolescent patients.

The availability of colorful rubber bands, different shaped brackets and themed accessories (Spiderman, Hello Kitty) such as retainer boxes, toothbrushes, etc., can make the orthodontic experience less intimidating.

Orthodontist Concerns

Obviously for the orthodontist, the treatment for adults, adolescents and children entails the same end goal; proper establishment of functional orthodontic aspects as well as dental-facial esthetics. A basic understanding and use of adjunctive psychological approaches can be brought into play by the orthodontist to make these goals easier for the patient and more productive for the practitioner especially in the case of reticent patients and/or their parents.

Internal vs External Motivators

External

  • Adult – perceived improved occupational opportunities, improved interpersonal relationships
  • Adolescent – peer pressure, parental pressure, perceived improved interpersonal relationships
  • Child – parental pressure.

Internal

  • Adult – increased self-esteem, personal goal achievement, more attractive appearance
  • Adolescent – social acceptance, self-actualization, more attractive appearance
  • Child – parental approval, “better’ smile.

With each age group and patient appointment, the orthodontist will have unique opportunities to establish and maintain solid partnerships and increase patient rapport. These opportunities come through a basic understanding, continued study and application of patient-practitioner interactive psychology.

A busy practitioner needs every opportunity to increase the amount of time they can spend with their patients. They also need to keep abreast of modern technologies. Manual cephalometric analysis is very time consuming and can be stressful. Cephx online cephalometric analysis makes available 50 generic and custom analyses that can be managed from any device. Psychologically speaking from the viewpoint of that same busy orthodontist, besides freeing up some extra time for patient communication, using the services of a dedicated and trusted online cephalometric analysis company can help to take away some of the stress related to manual analysis. Cephx makes available their exclusive “Algoceph” algorithm and provides Cloud storage for seamless record retrieval. Visit our main website at: Cephx

Read more about Orthodontic Services
and Reticent Orthodontic Patients – What’s On Their Minds?

History of Cephalometric Analysis – Using Our Heads

  1. CephX | AI Driven Dental Services
/in Blog

Interest in measuring the human form and skull has been around for millennia. The history of cephalometric analysis stems from Egyptian and Greek attempts at human body measurement (anthropometrics).

The term cephalometric is sometimes confused with craniometric. The former refers to measurement of the skull. The latter refers to measurement of the head including the soft tissue be it living or dead.

History of Cephalometric Analysis/Pre-Roentgen

4000 (BC) Egyptians: Canon of Proportions was a mathematical system developed to give idealistic proportions to the human form. Artistic forms were generated using a grid system.

Evidence of attempts at orthodontics and tooth “bridging systems” using wires have been found among the human remains of ancient civilizations. The idea that modern day orthodontics may have originated thousands of years ago, is certainly intriguing. This remaining ancient physical evidence of attempts at orthodontics indicates that the dentition and facial appearance were as important then as they are today.

* Although not strictly related to cephalometric contributions, attempts down through time have been made to qualify and quantify the human form by type. *

  • (c.460-c.370) Hippocrates: described two body types.
    Habitus phithicus: Long thin body
    Habitus apoplecticus: Short thick body
  • (1921) Kretschmer:
    Pyknic: Fat and stocky
    Asthenic: Weak, small and thin
    Athletic: Muscular and large boned
  • (1954) Sheldon:
    Endomorph: tending toward body fat
    Mesomorph: tending toward musculature
    Ectomorph: tending toward undeveloped muscle
  • (1452-1519) DaVinci: Arguably the first to try and systematically measure the head.

  • (1528) Albrecht Durer: A treatise on cranial measurements was the first published work in which anthropometry was applied to aesthetics.
  • (1678-1761) Pierre Fouchard: Published the “Surgeon Dentist” in 1728. Some consider him to be the “inventor” of orthodontics. Some of the “less than modern” methods of straightening teeth included finger pressure, metal plates lashed to abutment teeth, extractions and the use of a surgical instrument of the time called “The Pelican”. This instrument was used to make large forceful lingual to buccal tipping movements. If possible, it would have been interesting to talk to some of his teenage patients!
  • (1722-1789) Petrus Camper: introduced the facial angle, facial line and horizontal plane.
  • (1847) Joachim LaFoulon: Coined the term
  • (1796-1860) Anders Retzius: Credited with introducing the terms orthognathic, prognostic and the cephalic index.

Kingsley and Farrar are credited with being the “Fathers of Orthodontics”. Both wrote definitive books on orthodontics during the late 1800s.

Edward Angle was a paramount figure in orthodontics. His work in the early part of the twentieth century remains an influence in present day orthodontics.

Roentgen Leads The Way

(1895) Roentgen discovered X-rays in 1895 and submitted the paper, “On a New kind of Rays, a Preliminary Communication”. The following year Koening and Walkhoff simultaneously made the first dental X-ray of a tooth.

(1922) AJ Pacini is credited with making the first standard lateral view radiograph in 1922.

(1922) Paul Simon (Germany) becomes the first to use planes and angles in the diagnosis of dental anomalies

(1922-1931) During this period, various researchers reported on the use of radiographs in the practice of orthodontics. These contributions included the discovery of new radiographic landmarks and various attempts to incorporate and improve methods of diagnostic measurement including attempts to obtain a standardized practical method for obtaining radiographs.

(1931) Holly Broadbent along with Todd Wingate (United States), H. Hofrath (Germany) simultaneously developed the cephalostat. Broadbent occupies a special place in the evolution of cephalometrics as many of his principles and ideas have been accepted practice since their inception. Broadbent used a metric scale and reproducible head positioning of the cephalostat to eliminate the problems associated with previous unstandardized radiographic analysis.

(1937-1947) Much of the evolution of cephalometric analysis during this period was associated with investigating the craniofacial growth factors affecting orthodontic treatment (down and forward, Brodie 1941) and other factors relating to the dentation in its relationship to various craniofacial factors, (Margolis 1943, inclination of incisors).

(1948) William Downs is credited with developing the first cephalometric analysis. Over the ensuing years multiple cephalometric analysis methods have been established,

  • (1953) Steiner
  • (1954) Tweed
  • (1955) Sassouni
  • (1974) Harvold
  • (1975) Wits
  • (1979) Ricketts
  • (1985) McNamara
  • (1972) Jaraback

Technologies

Initially, cephalometric analysis was performed manually using acetate tracing paper and a lighted view box. Tracings of pertinent diagnostic lines using established orthodontic anatomical landmarks were drawn using a #3 lead pencil. This method of performing an analysis brings in problems of accurate analysis due to human error and differences of experience and expertise of the analyst.

Digital radiographs

(1960s) The proposition of digitalized radiographs as a vehicle for cephalometric analysis came into play and technologies have evolved since that time to make the process faster, easier and more accurate. Types of digital radiographs include:

  • Indirect digital
  • Direct
  • Semi-direct

Computed Tomography (CT) MRI, PET, PET/CT

(1971) First used in the United Kingdom. Technology improvements included reduction in time for the procedure due to increased number of slices produced in the same rotational period and increases in image size. Other imaging modalities followed.

  • (1980) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)
  • (1985) Positron Emission Tomography (PET)
  • (2000) Positron Emission Tomography/ Computed Tomography (PET/CT)

Initial dental use of CT was necessarily restricted due to the size and expense of the equipment. However, this technology was the basis and cornerstone of today’s use of CBCT in the science of cephalometric analysis.

Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT)

(1995) Tacconi and Mazzo develop a system to utilize CBCT technology for dental purposes.

(2001) CBCT was first introduced in the United States after the “New Tom 9000” machine was approved by the FDA. Using a cone beam rather than a fan beam along with other innovations allowed the equipment for CBCT to be reduced in size enough to be installed in the average dental setting and at a (comparably) affordable price.

(2007) Kodak introduces Ultra CBCT ILUMA scanner

(2007-present) Competition has resulted in different brands of CBCT machines offering their own design, branding advantages, etc. Most often these differences are related to field of view (FOV) and improvements in image resolution.

The increased use of CBCT has resulted in the necessity of a parallel technology improvement in rendering cephalometric analyses. Technology has resulted in computerized software models for in-office and online cephalometric analysis.

Founded in 2001, the online company Cephx has been at the forefront of developments in CBCT cephalometric analysis rendering technology. These developments in technology allow Cephx to provide orthodontists and other dental practitioners with cutting edge solutions regarding analyses, cloud storage and patient records management.

For more information please contact info@cephx.com or 1-800-992-1499

Read more about Orthodontic Services
and Case study – using CephX in full time orthodontics office

Orthodontic Adverse Effects – Helping Patients Understand Them

  1. CephX | AI Driven Dental Services
/in Blog

A discussion of orthodontic adverse effects and the signing of an informed consent document are important steps prior to the initiation of clinical orthodontic treatment procedures.

It has been demonstrated that patients may listen to an outline of possible dental or medical deleterious side effects, not really understand them, respond negatively when asked if they have any questions and then just routinely sign the consent form as a matter of habit.

This type of scenario invites misunderstandings down the orthodontic treatment “road” and experience shows there are usually at least a few bumps along this road for both patient and practitioner.

Clinical explanations of adverse effects may be met with nodding heads, but in many cases patients will have hardly a clue what the implications of say, “termination of treatment due to unexpected root resorption” or “exacerbation of temporo-mandibular joint disorder symptoms” may mean. Better to smooth out the road before traveling down it.

“I remind students that most of them possess the same limited understanding of medical language as many of their future patients, and I encourage them to always remember those feelings of confusion, uncertainty and anxiety.”  Dr. Frank R. Serrecchia, Midwestern University

While practitioners may not use the sterile clinical language as mentioned above when talking about adverse effects of orthodontic treatment or dentistry in general to their patients, making sure the patient has at least a reasonable layman’s understanding may help both parties know that they are “on the same page”. This approach can help mitigate later misunderstandings if treatment or patient expectations come into question.

If there is doubt that informed consent may be misunderstood or only partly understood by a layman, a practitioner need only look at the American Association of Orthodontists informed consent (1) form.  Although an excellent well thought out document, it informs the patient using dental jargon for the most part. Granted, this dental “language” may be required for legal purposes.

Arguably however, it is understandable that a patient might have some difficulties answering an honest  “yes” to the signature acknowledgement, “I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the treatment considerations and risks presented in this form.”.

As mentioned earlier, patients routinely glance over these types of consent forms and sign them without really knowing the contents. They generally rely and trust what the orthodontist has told them and leave it as that.

Explaining Orthodontic Adverse Effects – Analogies, Metaphors and Similes

A common strategy when attempting to explain complex problems (2)  in meaningful layman’s terms is the use of metaphors, similes and especially, analogies.

  • Analogy: compares things so that a relationship between them can be understood.
  • Simile: compares things by using “like” or “as”, e.g., an implant is like the root of a tooth.
  • Metaphor: compares by saying “is”, e.g., An implant is a “tooth root replacer”.

These methods may be helpful when outlining the nature of orthodontic treatment adverse effects during informed consent discussions.

While each practitioner will have preferences for creating unique analogies (3), similes or metaphors for their own patients and case situations, some examples of possible analogies involving some adverse effects are offered as a starting point.

  • Enamel decalcification – A suggested analogy is a comparison of how household products containing acid may erode, discolor or otherwise damage surfaces. This analogy can be combined with an explanation of how proper oral hygiene practices prevent acid from plaque and food debris from remaining in contact with the enamel around bracket edges, etc., causing “white spots”. Further, that in most cases any damage is usually temporary or can be easily treated micro –abrasion (“sanding”).
  • Periodontal problems – A visual comparison of the attached gingival with a shirt sleeve may help patients understand the progression and damage of periodontal disease from poor oral hygiene practices. A normal attached gingiva equated with a tight sleeve around the wrist, a looser sleeve compared with inflammation and more of the wrist showing – gingival recession.
  • Loss of pupal vitality – A plant may serve as an analogy where the pulp and periapical foramen blood vessels are compared with a plant. Pressure, crushing or cutting of the root (periapical vessels) causes eventual wilting and “death” of the plant.
  • Temporomandibular Disorders (TMD) – Many patients are likely to have suffered a “sore jaw”. However, it might be helpful to relate the Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) to a door hinge with a spring where repeated opening and closing of the hinge (TMJ) may cause the spring (muscles) to malfunction.
  • Root resorption – Although the exact reasons for root resorption are not understood, a comparison of an icicle shrinking with warmer temperature may be a good visual for a layman’s understanding.
  • Soft tissue damage – Any comparison of a hard object rubbing against a softer object could serve as an appropriate analogy for this adverse effect. One example might be how a carpet is damaged (traumatic ulcer) by excessive foot traffic.
  • Occlusal adjustment – Regarding the need for occlusal equilibration, any analogy that relates sanding an object so that it fits together correctly with another object would be apt.

Another suggestion for appointments that involve informed consent is to have patients repeat back in their own words their “take” on what has been discussed regarding informed consent and adverse effects.

Use of Images

“A picture is worth a thousand words” is certainly true when attempting to explain dental terminology and procedures to laymen patients.  The use of images and/or drawings combined with verbal analogic explanations may increase the chances for understanding by the patient.

If patients are having a difficult time understanding a concept, the use of photos (4), pictures and/or drawing a sketch may often be very helpful.  No art degree is required here. A simple pencil drawing of a tooth root followed by shorter and shorter shrinking tooth root images should suffice to demonstrate root resorption.

A notebook, tablet or computer containing selected photos and/or pictures from the orthodontist’s own practice or internet sources might be worth a small investment in time and a larger later investment not only in patient education, but helping to prevent future patient misinterpretations.

The approach of using analogies, similes and metaphors for helping patients understand  orthodontic adverse effects can be applied to other areas of treatment such as cephalometric analysis, wisdom tooth extraction etc.

Some practitioners may find this analogy, simile and metaphor patient communication method comes naturally to them, while others may find it difficult, cumbersome, seemingly unnecessary or awkward. However, the idea that good communication does enhance patient rapport (5), possible choice of an orthodontist (6) and/or prevent future “difficulties” may be a worthwhile incentive to practice a bit and give these ideas a “dental…….college” try.

References:

(1) http://www.columbia-ortho.com/Informed.pdf

(2) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gwinyai_Masukume/publication/221868357_Analogies_and_metaphors_in_clinical_medicine

(3) http://www.dentaleconomics.com/articles/print/volume-89/issue-3/features/clinical-scripts-for-effective-communication.html

(4) http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/mobileart.asp?articlekey=120284

(5) http://www.jyi.org/issue/trust-in-the-dentist-patient-relationship-a-review/

(6) https://cephx.com/hlow-do-patients-choose-their-orthodontist/

Save time and effort analyzing your cephalometric radiographs while helping your patients better understand their own treatment plans by visiting Cephx.

Discover the advantages of online cephalometric analysis in this area of patient care and more at Cephx.

For more information please contact info@cephx.com or 1-800-992-1499

Read more about How to Start an Orthodontic Practice
and Orthodontic Trends in 2015

Reticent Orthodontic Patients – What’s On Their Minds?

  1. CephX | AI Driven Dental Services
/in Blog

A consultation, a new referral, the elementary school child, the “whatever” teenager, the adult patient, what goes through their minds about orthodontics that they don’t vocalize to their practitioner for whatever reason.

What are the common concerns, worries and problems of these quiet and reticent orthodontic patients that may remain unspoken and lead to referral patients declining initial treatment, misunderstandings about adverse effects, unrealistic expectations or general poor patient rapport? It’s true that patients are seen over a period years, but with increased competition, auxiliaries performing more procedures and time management appointment philosophies limiting time to really talk to a patient, opportunities to initiate a real patient/doctor dialogue may be missed. There are numerous studies on healthcare patient interactions linking perceived “good” communication and positive trust issues ¹ as a major factor driving patient satisfaction, rather than other parameters of clinical treatment.

Reticent Orthodontic Patients – Great Expectations?

Informed consent is one of the primary standards of care in healthcare. Usual orthodontic consent and treatment plan discussions center around final cosmetic and functionality aspects, possible risks and limitations of treatment, special case considerations as well as patient responsibilities for ensuring optimum treatment.
Unfortunately, it is not unusual for patients to sign medical and dental consent forms as a matter of routine behavior without reading them, understanding them, or asking any questions. This occurs even after participating in treatment discussions and responding negatively when asking about any questions. This can result in later misunderstanding especially for those patients who feel that questioning a dentist is “inappropriate” or they subscribe to the “dentist/doctor knows best” philosophy.

Meeting Expectations

Areas where adults, teenagers, children and parents may have difficulties in articulating their concerns, communicating adequately, are embarrassed, socially awkward or a myriad of other reasons, fall into some common categories.

  • Economic difficulties are a major concern of parents and adults undergoing treatment. Orthodontic treatment is a large investment of time and money.  Many patients do worry about the cost and may be hesitant to reveal certain personal details concerning family finances e.g., whether they should delay treatment until they save enough money; will it be worth it and so on.
    Making concrete, sympathetic and reasonable individualized payment arrangements helps to allay financial concerns, affect choosing an orthodontist and may open a dialogue making a difference in starting or rejecting treatment.  A sub economic issue concerns transportation problems associated with taking children out of school, missing work, driving the child to appointments etc. Coordinating appointments as best as possible with individual patient situations allows them to voice their concerns rather than bottling them up.
  • Pain issues may not be brought up prior to treatment. Children may be afraid to ask. Orthodontic advertising tends to minimize any references to pain.  Adults may “tough it out” without notifying the practitioner, but inwardly resent having pain. Being upfront, sympathetic and providing information on pain management encourages patients to be vocal about their pain so that this side effect of treatment is not “stuffed” and then comes out later as a misunderstanding.
  • Appearance issues with braces have become less of a problem with orthodontics becoming more popular and accepted. Colored rubber bands, shaped brackets, ceramic materials and Invisalign treatment have minimized some of the “metal mouth” caricatures, especially for the child. However, bullying of children with braces can remain a problem ² and efforts on both the dentist and parent should be directed toward encouraging reporting of bullying.
  • Speech and diet concerns become an issue when patients experience real problems giving up foods that are detrimental to braces. Some patients may also experience speech problems with some appliances i.e., palatal expansion devices. Patients should be encouraged to report problems with maintaining dietary restrictions and feel empowered by dental staff to verbally report problems and seek advice without fear of “rebuke”.
  • Duration of treatment resentments may crop up at any point even though this parameter of treatment supposedly is universally understood as a core part of “having your teeth straightened”. Patients may grow tired of the length of treatment and lose their commitment to hygiene, internally complain and resent treatment. Rather than asking perfunctory questions like, “How are you doing?” or “Any questions?” and exiting the operatory for the next patient, a better approach may be to periodically take a few minutes and encourage the patient to talk about themselves and have a real conversation.

Some Psychology

A New York Times blog ³ with supporting research about the difficulties of speaking up at the medical doctor’s office readily reflects the same dynamics regarding the dental practitioner. There is a well-known dynamic where people may feel vulnerable or intimidated in a medical/dental setting. The prospect of speaking up, viewed as complaining, or asserting their views for some patients represents a possibility for negative consequences impacting their care.

This dynamic along with the ones listed under the heading above have resulted in various recommendations 4 to improve patient/practitioner communication.

L.A.S.T. is an acronym outlining a four-point list that might be used by busy orthodontists to help their patients feel better about “opening up” and lead to better patient rapport.

  1. Listen: Take a few extra minutes to really connect with patients.
  2. Apologize: “I’m sorry, next time let’s try and communicate better concerning your worries about your child being teased while wearing braces”.
  3. Speak: Encourage patients to speak their mind without fear of judgement.
  4. Thank: Let patients know you appreciate it when they are vocal about their concerns.

Busy orthodontists need as much time as possible to devote toward direct patient care and communication. Manual cephalometric analysis and tracing are time consuming and one area where extra time can be freed up for important communication aspects of practice management including more time understanding reticent orthodontic patients. Computerized cephalometric analysis now allows for multiple analyses and cloud storage within seconds.

References:

1: http://www.jyi.org/issue/trust-in-the-dentist-patient-relationship-a-review/

2: http://www.nymetroparents.com/article/why-are-some-kids-with-braces-bullied-and-how-to-boost-their-self-esteem

3:  http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/afraid-to-speak-up-at-the-doctors-office/?_r=0

4: http://www.nature.com/bdj/journal/v187/n5/full/4800251a.html

Discover the advantages of online cephalometric analysis in this area of patient care and more at Cephx.

For more information please contact info@cephx.com or 1-800-992-1499

Read more about How to Improve your Dental Practice
and Orthodontic Services

How do patients choose their Orthodontist

  1. CephX | AI Driven Dental Services
/in Blog

Choosing an orthodontist carries great responsibility, as it has a very clear effect on a person’s aesthetics and health. The majority of orthodontic patients are children, leaving the responsibility on parents to choose the right caregiver and treatment type. This task is taken very seriously, and followed by weeks of research.

In this article, we have gathered the considerations that help parents and patients in general make up the final decision – who to choose as their Orthodontist.

 

Awareness and knowledge – of the treatment’s importance, orthodontist’s existence

Acknowledgement of orthodontists and their expertise is a vital first step. A patient must distinguish between a dentist’s role and an orthodontist’s role, while choosing whom to approach for treatment.

Awareness can be achieved through schools and teachers, family physicians, governmental programs and the media.

Need and Treatment Motivation

Today, aesthetics is very important. Our role models showcase perfect smiles in the media and we want our kids and ourselves to have that too. In addition, there is also the element of healthcare when it comes to orthodontics (sleep disorders, painful teeth misalignment).

The patient’s need has to be there, either from the healthcare or aesthetics sides, in order to turn to a specialist. If the problem isn’t troubling enough, the condition may be left untreated.

Credibility, References and Trust – of the Practice and Orthodontist

Education is part of the credibility Orthodontists have. Patients normally check their physician’s education, and certification, while also want to ensure they are a Board Certified. This demonstrates a higher commitment and dedication, given the standards requirements.

References (recommendations by experienced friends) are also an important element patients look for. Word-of-mouth, recommendation, testimonials all act as great reference for a patient.

Technologically Equipped Clinic

People expect to receive leading treatment and to also fully understand it. The technology is available through improved software, larger screens, full images, laser innovations, advanced treatment materials, online Cephalometric analysis…etc. Orthodontists willing to ensure their clinic is staffed with leading technology and able to showcase it, are more likely to gain the customer.

Personal Connection

Trusting the doctor from an education perspective isn’t enough – if the personal connection isn’t there. Each patient looks for an assuring and easy-going caregiver, who is willing to listen to their questions, concerns and fears. Many doctors today may be very well educated, with lots of experience, but are less attentive to the emotional side of the treatment.  In situations as such, the patient will prefer to seek a different doctor, especially if there is a larger choice available nearby.

Affordable Costs & Payments

Affordable treatment prices are an important part of the patient’s decision making process, however it’s normally mentioned after overcoming the barriers mentioned earlier. It’s vital for the patient to first check their treatment type, and only then find out if they can afford it, considering various payment/finance options.

Many practices provide different payment terms, specifically since the actual orthodontic care is normally spread out through several months or even years.

Availability and Location

A treatment plan may be laid out over months and years, which is why patients tend to also choose their orthodontist according to the practice’s location and ease of travel.  Ensuring they can make the appointments, without loosing too much work or school days, due to traffic or parking issues is  important.

Recommendation

Every Orthodontist can play a major role in every single part of the listed items. Awareness creation, motivation, market education

  • Marketing plan – Maintain an online and social marketing plan, as that’s where most Patients start their research nowadays! Be sure to be listed on local/online directories, community organizations, healthcare programs.
  • Keep up to date – with new technologies, innovations, and treatment types. This will ensure your market competitiveness positioning.
  • Have your references, case studies, education easy to find. These can be publicized on the web, social media channels, and reviews by local/national magazines.
  • Make sure you choose a friendly staff with a welcoming and warm attitude.
  • Give back to the community – It’s always great to provide some pro-bono help. The community appreciates it, and increases your clinic’s credibility
  • Be ready for lots of questions, even if they sound repetitious or obvious.
  • Position your clinic in a good location, with good access to public transportation and parking.
Read more about Ricketts Cephalometric Analysis
and Cephalometric Analysis