J. Orthod.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kirschen, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Johal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kirschen, R.
Journal of Orthodontics, Vol. 30, No. 2, 178, June 2003
© 2003 British Orthodontic Society


Features Section

Letter to the Editor

Ama Johal and Robert Kirschen

Dear Sir

We would like to congratulate Jonathan Sandler for his direct, yet thought provoking guest editorial, published in the December 2002 edition of the Journal. The editorial highlighted the valuable contribution of space analysis in the planning and execution of orthodontic treatment. Whilst the majority of us would accept that orthodontics is by no means an exact science, fundamentally, it remains a question of redistribution of space. Orthodontics thus revolves around the assessment, planning and management of space.

The use of cephalometry as a useful tool to clinical diagnosis is taken for granted and is, indeed, expected of candidates sitting specialty examinations. Similarly, in an era of ever increasing public accountability for all aspects of treatment, it is not unreasonable to expect that the justification for proceeding with either extraction or non-extraction therapy should be based on a methodical and disciplined analysis of space. The same reasoning applies to other decisions, such as the need to prescribe intermaxillary elastics, functional appliances or headgear.

Whilst we are obviously committed to the analysis that has been evolving over the last 18 years at the Royal London Hospital,1,Go2Go we acknowledge that other space analyses have been described. More important is the recognition that a formal space analysis per se can assist the clinician to ascertain whether planned treatment goals can be attained, and whether the mechanics and anchorage proposed are appropriate to these goals. Nowhere is this more important than within our training institutions.


    References
 Top
 References
 
1 The Royal London Space Planning: An integration of space analysis and treatment planning. Part I: Assessing the space required to meet treatment objectives. Am J Orthod & Dentofac Orthop 2000; 118: 448–455.[Medline]

2 The Royal London Space Planning: An integration of space analysis and treatment planning. Part II: The effect of other treatment procedures on space. Am J Orthod & Dentofac Orthop 2000; 118: 456–461.[Medline]





This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Johal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kirschen, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Johal, A.
Right arrow Articles by Kirschen, R.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS