Assessing language use patterns for terminology to describe bimaxillary protrusive phenotypes
Authors
Advisor
Date
Embargo until
Language
Book title
Publisher
Peer Reviewed
Type
Research Area
Jurisdiction
Other Titles
See at
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate orthodontists’ terminology use for characterizing dentoalveolar segments and jaws that are prominently positioned relative to the cranium. Methods: An 11-item survey was distributed to orthodontists worldwide. Participants were asked to rate their preference for the terms “bimaxillary protrusion,” “bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion,” “bidental protrusion,” “bialveolar protrusion,” and “bidentoalveolar protrusion” in general, as well as in reference to lateral cephalograms that depicted various combinations of dentoalveolar and jaw protrusion. Results: Respondents most preferred “bimaxillary protrusion,” followed by “bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion,” to describe lateral cephalograms with dentoalveolar protrusion, with or without jaw protrusion. They did not consider a phenotype with only protrusion of apical jaw bases as bimaxillary protrusive. Moderation analyses found that older respondents were more likely to use “bidentoalveolar protrusion” for a phenotype with both jaw prognathism and protrusive teeth and “bidental protrusion” for a phenotype with normally positioned jaws with dentoalveolar protrusion. Non-native English speakers were overall more likely to prefer the term “bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.” Conclusions: Respondents generally showed a strong preference for “bimaxillary protrusion” over other terms to describe dentoalveolar protrusion and did not consider bimaxillary prognathism in the absence of dentoalveolar protrusion as bimaxillary protrusive.