Loading…

Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement

Purpose This Best Evidence Consensus Statement evaluated the existing Angle's classification clinical literature to determine if the Angle's classification as historically determined in maximum intercuspal position (MIP) with hand held casts is coincident with the centric occlusion (CO) de...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of prosthodontics 2021-04, Vol.30 (S1), p.67-71
Main Authors: Campbell, Stephen, Goldstein, Gary
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553
container_end_page 71
container_issue S1
container_start_page 67
container_title Journal of prosthodontics
container_volume 30
creator Campbell, Stephen
Goldstein, Gary
description Purpose This Best Evidence Consensus Statement evaluated the existing Angle's classification clinical literature to determine if the Angle's classification as historically determined in maximum intercuspal position (MIP) with hand held casts is coincident with the centric occlusion (CO) determined Angle's classification. In addition, it explored the value of using Angle's classification for edentulous patients Materials and methods The search strategy was related to the focus questions and limited to Meta‐analyses, Systematic Reviews (SR), Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Clinical Trials. Searches were completed using the term Angle's classification and Boolean Modifiers (AND) with the key terms: dental occlusion, dental occlusion centric, centric occlusion, centric relation, maximal intercuspation, MIP, intercuspal position, and edentulous patient, retrognathia, determination, and prognathia. Additional related articles were culled from the reference lists in the articles found in the PubMed searches. Results The search identified 494 articles related to the selected terminology. Titles were reviewed and selected if related to the focus questions for further review. Seven papers could be identified that addressed the specifics of the questions. Conclusions There is evidence that the Angle's classification for many patients will change when recorded in CO compared to the historical MIP determination/definition. A different Angle's classification recorded in CO is potentially a significant diagnostic finding for patients needing complete mouth rehabilitation. The current definitions of Angle's Classification are not useful in the management of edentulous patients.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/jopr.13307
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2470901251</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2470901251</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EoqWw4QNQJBYgpBQ_4sZhV6LyUqVWPKSyspxkAqlSu8QJqDv-gT_kS3BbYMGCWdjW3OOrmYvQPsFd4up0auZVlzCGww3UJpxRXwTRZNO9MY_8KCCTFtqxdooxIVyQbdRirkiP8zZ67OunEo6sF5fK2iIvUlUXRn--f_S9cWVs_Wwyo-si9WKjbZFBtdLPvHOwtTd4dR2dwkoEbRvr3dWqhhnoehdt5aq0sPd9d9DDxeA-vvKHo8vruD_0U8bD0E-4EIIK1UtCxnHKgzAkQgRA3ZmIDDhmwGiWYELzQDiR5UqkjPUgV5HgnHXQ8dp3XpmXxk0lZ4VNoSyVBtNYSYMQR-43Jw49_INOTVNpN52kHEdUBDRcUidrKnX72wpyOa-KmaoWkmC5DFwuA5erwB188G3ZJDPIftGfhB1A1sBbUcLiHyt5Mxrfrk2_ALTJivg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2509284271</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Campbell, Stephen ; Goldstein, Gary</creator><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Stephen ; Goldstein, Gary</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose This Best Evidence Consensus Statement evaluated the existing Angle's classification clinical literature to determine if the Angle's classification as historically determined in maximum intercuspal position (MIP) with hand held casts is coincident with the centric occlusion (CO) determined Angle's classification. In addition, it explored the value of using Angle's classification for edentulous patients Materials and methods The search strategy was related to the focus questions and limited to Meta‐analyses, Systematic Reviews (SR), Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Clinical Trials. Searches were completed using the term Angle's classification and Boolean Modifiers (AND) with the key terms: dental occlusion, dental occlusion centric, centric occlusion, centric relation, maximal intercuspation, MIP, intercuspal position, and edentulous patient, retrognathia, determination, and prognathia. Additional related articles were culled from the reference lists in the articles found in the PubMed searches. Results The search identified 494 articles related to the selected terminology. Titles were reviewed and selected if related to the focus questions for further review. Seven papers could be identified that addressed the specifics of the questions. Conclusions There is evidence that the Angle's classification for many patients will change when recorded in CO compared to the historical MIP determination/definition. A different Angle's classification recorded in CO is potentially a significant diagnostic finding for patients needing complete mouth rehabilitation. The current definitions of Angle's Classification are not useful in the management of edentulous patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1059-941X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-849X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/jopr.13307</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33331655</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Angle's classification ; centric occlusion ; Centric Relation ; Classification ; Clinical trials ; Consensus ; Dental occlusion ; Edentulous ; edentulous patients ; Humans ; Malocclusion ; Malocclusion, Angle Class III ; maximal intercuspal position ; Occlusion ; Prosthodontics ; Rehabilitation ; Terminology</subject><ispartof>Journal of prosthodontics, 2021-04, Vol.30 (S1), p.67-71</ispartof><rights>2020 by the American College of Prosthodontists</rights><rights>2020 by the American College of Prosthodontists.</rights><rights>2021 American College of Prosthodontists</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-5546-3518 ; 0000-0002-5675-8406</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33331655$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldstein, Gary</creatorcontrib><title>Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement</title><title>Journal of prosthodontics</title><addtitle>J Prosthodont</addtitle><description>Purpose This Best Evidence Consensus Statement evaluated the existing Angle's classification clinical literature to determine if the Angle's classification as historically determined in maximum intercuspal position (MIP) with hand held casts is coincident with the centric occlusion (CO) determined Angle's classification. In addition, it explored the value of using Angle's classification for edentulous patients Materials and methods The search strategy was related to the focus questions and limited to Meta‐analyses, Systematic Reviews (SR), Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Clinical Trials. Searches were completed using the term Angle's classification and Boolean Modifiers (AND) with the key terms: dental occlusion, dental occlusion centric, centric occlusion, centric relation, maximal intercuspation, MIP, intercuspal position, and edentulous patient, retrognathia, determination, and prognathia. Additional related articles were culled from the reference lists in the articles found in the PubMed searches. Results The search identified 494 articles related to the selected terminology. Titles were reviewed and selected if related to the focus questions for further review. Seven papers could be identified that addressed the specifics of the questions. Conclusions There is evidence that the Angle's classification for many patients will change when recorded in CO compared to the historical MIP determination/definition. A different Angle's classification recorded in CO is potentially a significant diagnostic finding for patients needing complete mouth rehabilitation. The current definitions of Angle's Classification are not useful in the management of edentulous patients.</description><subject>Angle's classification</subject><subject>centric occlusion</subject><subject>Centric Relation</subject><subject>Classification</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Consensus</subject><subject>Dental occlusion</subject><subject>Edentulous</subject><subject>edentulous patients</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Malocclusion</subject><subject>Malocclusion, Angle Class III</subject><subject>maximal intercuspal position</subject><subject>Occlusion</subject><subject>Prosthodontics</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Terminology</subject><issn>1059-941X</issn><issn>1532-849X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EoqWw4QNQJBYgpBQ_4sZhV6LyUqVWPKSyspxkAqlSu8QJqDv-gT_kS3BbYMGCWdjW3OOrmYvQPsFd4up0auZVlzCGww3UJpxRXwTRZNO9MY_8KCCTFtqxdooxIVyQbdRirkiP8zZ67OunEo6sF5fK2iIvUlUXRn--f_S9cWVs_Wwyo-si9WKjbZFBtdLPvHOwtTd4dR2dwkoEbRvr3dWqhhnoehdt5aq0sPd9d9DDxeA-vvKHo8vruD_0U8bD0E-4EIIK1UtCxnHKgzAkQgRA3ZmIDDhmwGiWYELzQDiR5UqkjPUgV5HgnHXQ8dp3XpmXxk0lZ4VNoSyVBtNYSYMQR-43Jw49_INOTVNpN52kHEdUBDRcUidrKnX72wpyOa-KmaoWkmC5DFwuA5erwB188G3ZJDPIftGfhB1A1sBbUcLiHyt5Mxrfrk2_ALTJivg</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Campbell, Stephen</creator><creator>Goldstein, Gary</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5546-3518</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5675-8406</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement</title><author>Campbell, Stephen ; Goldstein, Gary</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Angle's classification</topic><topic>centric occlusion</topic><topic>Centric Relation</topic><topic>Classification</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Consensus</topic><topic>Dental occlusion</topic><topic>Edentulous</topic><topic>edentulous patients</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Malocclusion</topic><topic>Malocclusion, Angle Class III</topic><topic>maximal intercuspal position</topic><topic>Occlusion</topic><topic>Prosthodontics</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Terminology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Campbell, Stephen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goldstein, Gary</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of prosthodontics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Campbell, Stephen</au><au>Goldstein, Gary</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement</atitle><jtitle>Journal of prosthodontics</jtitle><addtitle>J Prosthodont</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>S1</issue><spage>67</spage><epage>71</epage><pages>67-71</pages><issn>1059-941X</issn><eissn>1532-849X</eissn><abstract>Purpose This Best Evidence Consensus Statement evaluated the existing Angle's classification clinical literature to determine if the Angle's classification as historically determined in maximum intercuspal position (MIP) with hand held casts is coincident with the centric occlusion (CO) determined Angle's classification. In addition, it explored the value of using Angle's classification for edentulous patients Materials and methods The search strategy was related to the focus questions and limited to Meta‐analyses, Systematic Reviews (SR), Randomized Controlled Trials (RCT) and Clinical Trials. Searches were completed using the term Angle's classification and Boolean Modifiers (AND) with the key terms: dental occlusion, dental occlusion centric, centric occlusion, centric relation, maximal intercuspation, MIP, intercuspal position, and edentulous patient, retrognathia, determination, and prognathia. Additional related articles were culled from the reference lists in the articles found in the PubMed searches. Results The search identified 494 articles related to the selected terminology. Titles were reviewed and selected if related to the focus questions for further review. Seven papers could be identified that addressed the specifics of the questions. Conclusions There is evidence that the Angle's classification for many patients will change when recorded in CO compared to the historical MIP determination/definition. A different Angle's classification recorded in CO is potentially a significant diagnostic finding for patients needing complete mouth rehabilitation. The current definitions of Angle's Classification are not useful in the management of edentulous patients.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><pmid>33331655</pmid><doi>10.1111/jopr.13307</doi><tpages>5</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5546-3518</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5675-8406</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1059-941X
ispartof Journal of prosthodontics, 2021-04, Vol.30 (S1), p.67-71
issn 1059-941X
1532-849X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2470901251
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects Angle's classification
centric occlusion
Centric Relation
Classification
Clinical trials
Consensus
Dental occlusion
Edentulous
edentulous patients
Humans
Malocclusion
Malocclusion, Angle Class III
maximal intercuspal position
Occlusion
Prosthodontics
Rehabilitation
Terminology
title Angle's Classification–A Prosthodontic Consideration: Best Evidence Consensus Statement
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T00%3A45%3A08IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Angle's%20Classification%E2%80%93A%20Prosthodontic%20Consideration:%20Best%20Evidence%20Consensus%20Statement&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20prosthodontics&rft.au=Campbell,%20Stephen&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=S1&rft.spage=67&rft.epage=71&rft.pages=67-71&rft.issn=1059-941X&rft.eissn=1532-849X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/jopr.13307&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2470901251%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3577-b588828a6b7350c54771884e2188b8de503e32db012f487713fa8c336efa98553%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2509284271&rft_id=info:pmid/33331655&rfr_iscdi=true