Orthodontists chew over alternative 'orthotropics' treatment

08 Jan 2012 05:46p.m.

Teri wrote:

I have received both treatments growing up, and was an actual patient of Dr John C Muir, the orthodontist speaking against orthotropics. At the age 11 I started my treatment with him having 2 teeth pulled out which took a further 4 years for them to come back down. In the mean time I was given a retainer. After 2 years I had not been rescheduled with Dr Muir so my father took me to another orthodontist Dr James Innes, who uses orthotropics. The problem with my mouth was I had an underbite and all of my front teeth lapped over each other with my k9 teeth, the ones Dr Muir had pulled were coming through at weird angles causing my jaw to lock and giving me severe headaches. I had a 'spring' put in the roof of my mouth to stretch my top jaw, I wore this for roughly a year. I definitely noticed a difference after 3 months my headaches had stopped and my jaw stopped locking and clicking also my k9s had room to come through and no longer hurt as much either. After the spring was removed I had 'brackets' (also known as braces aka train tracks) put on my top teeth with rubber bands to close the gaps between my k9s and molars. A few months later my bottom teeth were fitted with brackets, rubber bands and springs on a few of the front teeth. After 2 years of wearing Brackets I was given a retainer, but being a teenager I stopped wearing it and had to get brackets fitted again for a year then again I was back on to a retainer and have been wearing a retainer now for 4 years. Prior to treatment I could poke my tongue out through my teeth when biting together and had difficulty breathing through my nose. Now I don't snore and am often complimented on how beautiful my smile is. I have cousins and siblings that have received the more traditional technique and also received a little myself, personally I would only recommend orthotropics. The process takes a little longer and there is a bit more pain involved but the end results are amazing! No pain, No gain.

16 Dec 2011 12:47p.m.

Kiwi wrote:

@Neil. I know exactly who Vernon Kruger is. That's why I wrote what I did. That is also why I can say with some certainty that I am far more qualified than Dr Kruger to comment on these matters. To say that there is no evidence in support of the philosophy (i shall call it that as it most certainly isn't a science) behind the rather strangely monikered "orthotropics" is not entirely true, for the weight of literature in orthodontic research infact totally debunks this quackery. As Gillian B so succinctly put it in her post, treatment involving expansion to avoid tooth extraction is carried out routinely by Registered Specialist Orthodontists (I suspect that this is not a term you will find when you type "Dr Vernon Kruger" into Google). However the training that such specialists undertake equips them to diagnose each case as an individual - taking into account dental, skeletal and growth factors. It is the goal of every orthodontist to complete every case without extracting teeth. However, after taking into account the factors I have just mentioned, it may, in some cases be the most appropriate course of action to extract teeth. Such decisions are based on scientific evidence, and not anecdotal scaremongering as seems to be the case with these Orthotropists. As a final point - @Kerry. As you avoided extractions in your conventional orthodontic treatment, I suspect that had you seen an orthotropist the adverse effects you encountered as a result of your treatment would have been exactly the same. A flattened, narrow gaunt face? THe orthotropists would say that this is caused by extractions!!!

12 Dec 2011 04:52p.m.

Gillian B wrote:

It's ridiculous that you are poisoning parents minds and making them think that it's ok to go to the dentist to get specialist orthodontic work done, would you go to a doctor and get him to give you open heart surgery for a faulty heart? NO you wouldn't and that's my point. Ok so in that sense orhto work isn't life threatening much like open heart surgery but my point is that if you were to get work done you should get it done properly with somebody who has sacrificed alot of money and study time in order to give the best results not someone who just has an 'intrest'

As somebody who works at an orhtodontic practice i am obliged to say that we do not recommend teeth out or any treatment if it's not necessary. Every mouth is different and due to that everybody has a different type of treatment that suits them. Hence we do similar treatment to the orthotropic treatment if the patient needs that certain treatment for the best result.
It's far too often we have patients coming in who have spent alot of money with dentists only to find that they weren't diagnosed properly so of course the treatment didn't work and we are left to clean up the mess.

In the end it's your choice where you spend your money but the best thing to do is get it done right the first time, if you are ever unsure you can always get a second opinion at another orthodontists..

11 Dec 2011 06:52p.m.

ali ukra wrote:

Continued: Your report fails to distinguish the difference between specialist orthodontists who have dedicated three years of full-time study devoted to the Discipline of Orthodontics, and sacrificed three years of income as a dentist to achieve the higher qualification to provide a safe, proven and advocated standard of service. This situation is in contrast to general dental practitioners that attend weekend courses to undertake orthodontic treatment without the adequate scientific background and knowledge which they base their treatment on. They employ a one-treatment-fits-all approach and due to their lack of knowledge subject children to treatment periods lasting an unacceptable number of years while misleading the public. Your report gave the impression that all orthodontists do is, extract teeth. That is a misguided and ignorant comment to make. As I have previously eluded, orthodontists use the same appliances/plates in the right circumstances and routinely do orthodontic treatment without extractions in the appropriate cases. The literature in most countries shows that extractions occur in around 30% of orthodontic cases, and along with the Discipline of Orthodontics, University of Otago summary, given to your reporter, the literature demonstrates that profiles are altered by a millimeter or less in certain extraction cases, and in some cases are improved

10 Dec 2011 08:22a.m.

ali ukra wrote:

Regarding your item on the coined term "orthotropics", is that the standard of reporting you pride yourselves on in your show and on tv3?? The report was biased, misleading and filled with inaccuracies that render the item inappropriate and negligible. The editing of the report failed to mention what "orthotropics" actually is. Simply defining it as using "plates to grow the jaws". It failed to properly define the treatment modalities used and the full extent of the treatment period involved, including a period of treatment with traditional fixed appliances (braces) following the use of the plates- what John Mew referred to as "train-tracks" that was so wrong about traditional treatment. This has left many people believing that braces are not needed, whereas infact, not only are they needed, the treatment period is often, in the majority of cases in excess of 4 years. It also failed to report that orthodontists used a variety of plates for different malocclusions including plates to expand the upper jaws, push single teeth, modify/reposition the jaws etc, which are in fact the same plates that are used in “orthotropics”. This was observed by your reporter in John Muir's office, much to her surprise. Orthodontists tailor each treatment plan according to each individual with their profile as one of the primary determinants for the resultant treatment plans. They do not use a one-treatment-fits-all philosophy as nonspecialist dentists with inadequate training employ. Reporting that orthodontics and orthodontists are outdated and not current is a farse. A large part of the specialising degree is dedicated to being up-to-date with the scientific literature and exposure to the latest technologies and treatments. You are meant to thoroughly research a topic prior to reporting on it and you have failed miserably to deliver a balanced and accurate report. Instead it is grossly negligible and insulting.

09 Dec 2011 02:20p.m.

jan wrote:

about 30 years ago my sister had to have orthadontal treatment. she now has a narrow palette and now can't fit a teaspoon on the roof of her mouth, try it to see if you can. I enquired to a tooth i have which sticks out a bit. was told a tooth would have to be removed so the sticky out one could be fit in with the others. I never took up the treatment. My teeth work fine and would not want a perfectly fine tooth removed. I do have a friend who never had braces and his teeth although in good condition are really messy, in situations like this don't know why they were left, unless tooth pulling was also offered to them. There should be more options for us all to consider, instead of one size fits all approach.

08 Dec 2011 10:17p.m.

Mother wrote:

My daughter was recommended to have 2 pulled and braces put on but I wouldn't hear of it till I'd investigated alternatives and costs! I'd heard about this other method and when I mentioned it to this orthodontist, some reference was made about dentists flying overseas for a weekend to learn how it's done!! Case of income protection for the traditional practitioners (I believe myself)!! With orthotropics, braces were still used to straighten the teeth !! However, my teenage daughter wasn't too co-operative about wearing the retainer at night so our results weren't quite as good as they could have been - however there was a 'lifetime satisfaction guarantee' so we'll be going back to pursue that !!

08 Dec 2011 10:08p.m.

Kerry wrote:

Do not have traditional orthodontics!
Although I did not need them I got conned into braces and while I escaped extractions there was still huge damage done by braces-
-flattened, narrow gaunt face.
-jaw problems.
-neck (growth) problems resulting in terrible headaches.
-ruined my bite.
-root resorption- told will probably lose teeth
-effected breathing
It is so wrong that they know what they are doing yet continue to do so for money! It has to stop!

08 Dec 2011 04:55p.m.

Shar wrote:

Ironically, my daughter had an orthodontist appointment the day after this story screened! We've been given 3 options, two of which involve removing 4 teeth and then fitting braces etc (to fix overcrowding teeth). Aside from the appalling hygiene practice of the orthodontist, I was left completely floored by what could be $6,000+ costs! I'm from Northland, and we don't have alot of options up here - so not sure what to do next or even who to approach for a second opinion??

08 Dec 2011 12:43p.m.

Neil wrote:

@Kiwi - perhaps before you criticise you should do a Google on Dr Vernon Kruger (assuming the post above is actually by the man himself of course!!)