ROLE OF THIRD MOLARS IN ANTERIOR CROWDING: DELUSION OR VINDICATION?

Authors: Abha Chansoria, Yogesh Gupta, Varunjeet Chaudhary, Kratika Mishra

DOI: 10.18231/j.jco.8133.1758356136

Keywords: Third molars, Third molars in crowding,Orthodontists opinion,Position of third molars effecting crowding

Abstract: Aim: The aim of this study was to perceive the viewpoint of orthodontists with respect to role of third molars in crowding of anterior teeth in both upper and lower arches, whether they are in favour of prophylactic removal of third molars or not, the position of third molars most commonly responsible for crowding in the anterior teeth region and the variation of opinion among orthodontists with respect to years of experience. Materials required: Online questionnaire (Google documents), Offline questionnaire, Microsoft excel. Method: Orthodontists in India registered with the Indian Orthodontic Society were sent an online questionnaire via social media applications and email. The questionnaire included questions based on their opinion on role of third molars in crowding of teeth in the anterior segment in context with which arch would more likely be affected, whether they support prophylactic removal of third molars, which position of impacted third molar is most commonly responsible and whether the years of experience of the orthodontist affects their viewpoint. The results were evaluated and on the basis of it an opinion of the orthodontists in India, registered with the Indian Orthodontic Society was established. Results: According to the data received, the orthodontists believe that maxillary third molars are not responsible for crowding in maxillary anterior teeth but their opinion differed when considering mandibular third molars. A majority of 68.9% of the respondents favoured the fact that mandibular third molars are responsible for crowding of mandibular anterior teeth. They also supported that mandibular third molars should be extracted to prevent crowding in mandibular anterior region but prophylactic removal of third molars were acceptable only in 48.5% of the interviewed orthodontists. A significant difference was noted with respect to age of experience. The younger dentists proposed to prophylactically extract the third molars whereas the senior dentists did not accept this theory.