Patients’ decisions regarding orthodontic treatment are influenced by a variety of factors, such as their subjective opinions of how their oral cavity looks, age, gender, educational level, and income. The present study aimed to measure the orthodontic treatments needs for the Saudi Arabian population, and also to report potential barriers towards it. It is an observational study with cross sectional design. Data was collected from nationals and residents living in Saudi Arabia and who are at least 18 years old. A total of 1184 adult patients (880 females and 304 males) were included in this study. The population for the study was reached and chosen using a non-probability snowball sampling method. A validated and reliable questionnaire was distributed to the participants electronically through google form. Inferential statistics was applied using Pearson Chi Square test. p value < 0.05 was considered significant. The majority of the sample (73.2%) exhibited a favorable attitude toward orthodontic treatment. Most participants including male and female gender wanted orthodontic treatment primarily to have their protruding teeth fixed. The proportion of persons who cited chewing difficulty as the reason they needed orthodontic treatment was strongly influenced by the monthly income variable (p = 0.005). Cost and time of orthodontic therapy were the biggest obstacles to undergoing treatment, accounting for 34.5% and 19.5%, respectively. There was highly significant difference between the underlying medical conditions and the age and monthly income variables (p = 0.000). Based on the findings of the present study, it can be concluded that protruding teeth are the most important treatment needs perceived by the Saudi population, followed by spacing in between teeth, crowding of teeth, and unaesthetic smile. Cost of the orthodontic treatment was identified as the most significant barrier to the treatment needs, followed by long duration of orthodontic treatment, and pain.

Objective: To investigate the significant impact of oral health on the quality of life of older individuals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, across various socioeconomic and demographic contexts. Methods: A cross- sectional study was conducted, involving the distribution of a translated online questionnaire based on the OHQoL-UK® tool to evaluate oral health-related quality of life OHRQoL. This included utilizing the Oral Health Quality of Life Scale to assess overall quality of life. Results: A total of 586 participants were involved in the study, with the majority being over 60 years old (77.1%). The mean score of OHRQoL was 3.79. The Social Dental Scale SDS had a mean score of 0.71. The General Oral Health Assessment GOHS scored 3.51 on average. The mean score of Dental Impact Profile DIP was 3.12. The Subjective Oral Health Status Indicators SOHSIs had a mean score of 3.82. The mean score of Oral Health Benefit of Life Inventory OHBLI averaged at 4.04, and Dental Impact on Daily Living DIDL scored an average of 4.05. The mean scores of OHRQoL and Oral Impacts on Daily Performance OIDP were 3.90 and 3.89 respectively. Cronbach’s Alpha values ranged from 0.854 to 0.939, with an overall questionnaire reliability of 0.977, indicating a good reliability of the study’s tool. Conclusion: Older adults exhibited lower OHRQoL compared to younger adults, particularly influenced by factors such as health insurance coverage, monthly income, and educational level. It is essential to develop health programs specifically tailored for senior adults to safeguard their overall health and quality of life. Making health and medical insurance obligatory and accessible to all individuals is crucial for enhancing their QoL and reducing the diseases.

Orthodontists have a variety of options available for retainers. Research in Orthodontics focuses on assessing outcomes important to clinicians; however, there is inconsistency in how these outcomes are selected and evaluated. This review sought to assess the effects of different orthodontic retainers on patients’ quality of life (QoL). Various approaches were employed in this systematic review, and a thorough search was conducted across six databases. The review involved a comprehensive evaluation of six included studies, highlighting changes in dental structure post-treatment, emphasizing the role of extraction procedures and the quality of debonding in improving retention. The study identified key outcomes for orthodontic clinical trials, highlighting orthodontists' preferences for specific retainer types. Moreover, it discussed the impact of sociocultural influences on retention care. Involving patients actively in discussions about whether to end or extend the retention phase was deemed essential. Noteworthy improvements in occlusal outcomes were linked to extraction treatments. Gender and malocclusion severity influenced QoL before and after orthodontic treatment. The degree of improvement observed in the Class III malocclusion group was comparatively lower than that in the Class I and Class II groups. Orthodontic treatment was found to yield favorable psychological outcomes, as evidenced by notable enhancements in self-esteem and social engagement among individuals. Fixed appliances were shown to negatively affect oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), particularly for those with aesthetic and functional concerns. A consensus has been reached on the essential themes and outcomes that should be incorporated in clinical trials related to orthodontic retention for non-cleft and non-surgical cases.

Orthodontic treatment during adolescence can contribute to the development of problematic eating disorders. This case study presents the situation of a 12-year-old male patient who experienced a prolonged period of dietary limitation, showed signs of chronic illness, and underwent a significant weight loss because of wearing dental braces. These circumstances triggered the emergence of atypical eating behaviors and complicated the therapeutic process. A case report highlights the effectiveness of conducting psychological evaluations for patients with braces who experience significant weight loss to address possible eating disorders. It also addressed the effectiveness of psychoeducation supportive therapy and nutritional rehabilitation for establishing regular eating patterns during orthodontic treatment. This case also illustrates the significant role of parents in offering emotional support and enhancing professional care. However, conducting extensive longitudinal studies is imperative to fully explore the relationship between orthodontic treatment and eating disorders.

Ethics is based on moral principles that should be the foundation for every healthcare decision, however, ethical concepts can often be challenging to define in specific clinical scenarios. There are several instances where a practising clinician often finds it difficult to make a proper decision despite maintaining integrity and professionalism. The objective of the present study was to explore the ethical dilemma faced by orthodontists practicing in Saudi Arabia concerning orthodontic treatment. This was a questionnaire-based cross-sectional study that was adapted from the scenarios of ethical dilemmas presented by Jerrold in 1998. Ten orthodontists from each province of Saudi Arabia were requested to participate in this study and the questionnaire were sent through email and their responses were analysed. A total of 37 responses were obtained (out of 130) with a response rate of 28.46%. Among them 23 were female and 14 were male. Most participants belonged to the age group 30–39 years and most of them have clinical experience of more than 5 years. There was a wide variation in the responses among the participants in all the scenarios presented. The median likelihood of getting similar scenarios in their clinical practice in Saudi Arabia ranged from 3 to 3.5. There was a wide variation in the opinion among the practising orthodontists in Saudi Arabia in the scenarios presented. The presented scenarios are less likely to be perceived in the local context and some new situations of ethical dilemmas are identified.

Objectives: The objective of this study was to delve into predictors of adherence in adult orthodontic patients as stated by orthodontists in Saudi Arabia. Material and Methods: Ninety-one orthodontists from Saudi Arabia completed a questionnaire in relation to the importance and frequency of use of predictors of adherence. In this cross-sectional quantitative and exploratory study, orthodontists were requested to rate the predictors of adherence on a five-point Likert scale. The questionnaire in this study was categorized into four sections such as (1) evaluation – their opinion on the importance of predictor in the assessment of patient adherence, (2) application – scope of use of each predictor in the assessment of adherence in the routine practice, (3) open-ended questions to amass information about other apparent predictors of adherence, and (4) demographics. Results: Mixed and variable responses were obtained in terms of the importance and extent of application of predictors in assessing patient adherence. The survey revealed the most important predictors for adherence that included patient’s adherence to appointments and their cooperation in handling dental appliances, and maintenance of oral hygiene. However, in actual practice, orthodontists were frequently implementing factors such as the patient to keep appointments, the patient is observed to be involved in treatment, and the patient is observed to be enthusiastic about treatment. Through the open-ended questions, multiple factors were reported that need to be explored further. However, the remaining factors reported for adherence portrayed varied patterns. Conclusion: Predictors of adherence were reported with varying extent of consistency among orthodontists in Saudi Arabia. However, adherence to appointment, co-operation in handling of appliances, and oral hygiene emerged as the most significant factors by the orthodontists for adherence in cases of adult patients.