Academic literature on the topic 'Orthognathic surgery'

Thesis (M.S.)--University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2008.<br>Title from electronic title page (viewed Sep. 16, 2008). "... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the School of Dentistry Orthodontics." Discipline: Orthodontics; Department/School: Dentistry.

Objectives: To report the incidence of objective and subjective neurosensory disturbance (NSD) after orthognathic surgery in a major orthognathic centre in Hong Kong, and to investigate the risk factors that contributed to the incidence of NSD after orthognathic surgery. Materials and Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study on NSD after orthognathic surgery in a local major orthognathic centre. Patients who had bimaxillary orthognathic surgery reviewed at post-operative 6 months, 12 months or 24 months were recruited to undergo a neurosensory test with subjective and 3 objective assessments. Possible risk factors of NSD including subjects’ age and gender, surgical procedures and surgeons’ experience were analyzed. Results: 238 patients with 476 sides each of maxillary and mandibular procedures were recruited. The incidences of subjective NSD after maxillary procedures were 16.2%, 13% and 9.8% at post-operative 6 months, 12 months and 24 months, respectively; the incidences of subjective NSD after mandibular procedures were 35.4%, 36.6% and 34.6% at post-operative 6 months, 12 months and 24 months, respectively. Objective neurosensory tests showed general reduced sensitivity in subjects with subjective NSD. Increased age was found to be a significant risk factor of NSD after orthognathic surgery at short term (at 6 months and 12 months) but not at 24 months. SSO has a significantly higher risk of NSD when compared to VSSO. SSO in combination with anterior mandibular surgery has a higher risk of NSD when compared to VSSO in combination with anterior mandibular surgery or anterior mandibular surgery alone. Gender of patients a nd surgeons’ experience were not found to be risk factors of NSD after orthognathic surgery. Conclusion: The incidence of NSD after maxillary and mandibular orthognathic procedures at post-operative 6 months, 12 months and 24 months was reported. Increased age was identified as a risk factor of short term post-operative NSD but not in long term (24 months or more). Specific mandibular procedures were related to higher incidence of NSD after orthognathic surgery.<br>published_or_final_version<br>Dental Surgery<br>Master<br>Master of Dental Surgery

Objective: Facial visible difference has a range of impacts not only functional and aesthetic but also in terms of the emotional and social wellbeing of patients. The aim of the study is to develop a theory that explains a person’s experience of the orthognathic treatment. Methods: The study was a qualitative cross-sectional grounded theory study. Semi-structured interviews were used to explore the experience of orthognathic patients undergoing treatment in a NHS hospital in the UK. Face to face interviews with 22 orthognathic patients (4 male and 18 female; age range 18-66 years) were conducted. Of these, 12 participants had had surgery six-eight weeks prior to the interview, six were in the decision making phase for orthognathic treatment and four participants had had the surgery one-two years prior to the interview. Further theoretical sampling and data collection was carried out from online blogs and forums on orthognathic treatment. Grounded theory methodology was used for the analysis of the data collected. Results: Analysis of the interviews indicated that during the process of orthognathic surgery, patients go through a status passage of ‘normal facing’. Orthognathic patients were inducted into this passage through their dentists, peer influence in the form of teasing and bullying about facial appearance, knowledge of orthodontic treatment gained from peers and their own perceptions of self-image. Decision making for orthognathic treatment influenced this status passage of ‘normal facing’, which, in turn, was influenced both positively and negatively by external factors. Temporality played a key role in normal facing. The factors that influenced the shape of this passage were the patient’s social support system, post-surgery recovery, quality of care, age of the patient, patient’s own life priorities, the preparedness of the patients in the form of information about the treatment, and the role of professionals involved in care provision. ‘Normal facing’ appeared to positively influence the patient’s coping behaviour and self-perception. Conclusions: Orthognathic patients undergo a scheduled status passage of ‘normal facing’, which appears to be influenced by various clinical, demographic and psychosocial factors. This status passage consequently influenced the person’s self-perception.