Background and Objectives: Orthodontic treatment, whether fixed or removable, offers several benefits, including improved aesthetics, enhanced oral function, and increased self-confidence. However, it may also cause discomfort and pain, particularly following adjustment visits. This study aimed to assess pain characteristics (latency and continuity), food impairment, weight loss, and analgesic use in relation to treatment duration and appliance type. Methods: This observational study included 160 orthodontic patients who completed a structured questionnaire comprising 13 single-choice items. The questionnaire assessed age, gender, residential environment, educational status, type and duration of orthodontic treatment, pain characteristics (duration, latency, continuity), food impairment, and analgesic use. Inclusion criteria specified patients with moderate anterior crowding undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment or treatment with clear aligners on both arches, for at least one month. All fixed appliance cases involved 0.022-inch-slot Roth prescription brackets. Results: Patients undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment reported a higher frequency of pain (91.4%), greater need for analgesics (95.2%), and more food impairment compared to those with clear aligners. Patients treated for less than 6 months more frequently reported pain lasting 1 week (57.1%), while those treated for 1–2 years more commonly reported pain lasting several days (43.8%). Conclusions: Fixed orthodontic appliances are associated with greater discomfort, longer pain latency, more frequent analgesic use, and higher dietary impact compared to clear aligners. These findings emphasize the importance of personalized patient counseling and proactive pain management to improve compliance, enhance quality of life, and support informed decision-making in orthodontic care.

Background/Objectives: Orthodontic treatment offers significant functional and aesthetic benefits, but it often causes discomfort, impacting patients’ daily activities, including diet and medication use. The primary aim of this observational study was to assess the influence of orthodontic patients’ age, gender, and living environment on pain duration, diet impairment, and analgesic use one week after their first adjustment visit to the orthodontist. Methods: This observational study included a sample of 194 orthodontic patients who completed a questionnaire consisting of six single-choice questions. The questions addressed the following variables: age, gender, living environment, pain duration, diet impairment, and analgesic use. The main inclusion criteria encompassed undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment on the upper arch for one week using a 0.0016-inch superelastic NiTi archwire (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, WI, USA) and presenting moderate to severe crowding of the upper and lower anterior teeth. Results: Female patients were significantly more likely to experience diet impairment than males (51.9% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.013). Among female patients reporting pain lasting approximately one week, a higher proportion resided in rural areas (25% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.045), whereas male patients reporting the same pain duration predominantly lived in urban areas (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.028). Overall, 55.7% of participants used analgesics, with females in rural areas being the most frequent users. Additionally, patients who used analgesics were significantly more likely to experience diet impairment than those who did not (64.3% vs. 49.1%, p = 0.041). Conclusions: Female patients residing in rural areas reported a longer duration of pain, which led to a greater likelihood of experiencing diet impairment and increased consumption of analgesics compared to their counterparts. These findings highlight the need for personalized pain management strategies in orthodontic treatment, especially for patients with increased vulnerability to discomfort.

Objectives: The present study aimed to evaluate the sexual dimorphism of skeletal and dental anomalies in Romanian orthodontic patients and to describe several important cephalometric measurements in patients with dental malocclusions. Materials and Methods: A total of 450 orthodontic records of patients older than 8 years were evaluated. On lateral cephalometric radiographs, the following cephalometric angles were digitally determined: SNA, SNB, ANB, FMA, IMPA, Max1-FH, SN-Go-Gn, N-A-Pog, Ar-Go-Me, and interincisal angle. The sagittal skeletal and dental malocclusions were diagnosed by two calibrated investigators. Results: The sample comprised 58% females, with a mean age of 20.07 (±8.63) years. The prevalence of dental malocclusions within the Romanian orthodontic sample taken into study was: 50.7% class I, 26.7% class II division 1, 13.3% class III, 4.7% class II, and class II division 2. The prevalence of skeletal anomalies within the Romanian orthodontic patient sample was: 43.3% class I, 28.7% class II due to retrognathic mandible, 17.3% class II due to prognathic maxilla, 8.7% class III due to prognathic mandible, and 2% class III due to retrognathic maxilla. Female patients presented more frequently with Class I or Class II division 2 malocclusion, whereas male patients more frequently exhibited Class III malocclusion. Female patients exhibited skeletal Class II more frequently due to retrognathic mandible, while skeletal Class III, due to prognathic mandible, was more common in male patients. Male patients were more frequently normodivergent, while female patients were more frequently hyperdivergent. Female patients exhibited retroclined upper incisors more frequently, whereas male patients exhibited proclined upper incisors more frequently. Most of the patients with class II division 1 malocclusion were females and exhibited the following cephalometric characteristics: a class II skeletal anomaly due to retrognathic mandible, normal SNA angle, decreased SNB angle, increased ANB angle, proclined upper incisors, proclined lower incisors, decreased interincisal angle, normal vertical growth pattern, closed mandibular angle, and convex facial profile. Most of the patients with class II division 2 malocclusion were females and exhibited the following cephalometric characteristics: a class II skeletal anomaly due to retrognathic mandible, normal SNA angle, decreased SNB angle, increased ANB angle, retroclined upper incisors, proclined lower incisors, increased interincisal angle, hypodivergent vertical growth pattern with a short face tendency, closed mandibular angle, and convex facial profile. Most of the patients with class III malocclusion were males and exhibited the following cephalometric characteristics: both class I and III skeletal anomaly due to prognathic mandible, normal SNA angle, increased SNB angle, decreased ANB angle, proclined upper incisors, normally inclined lower incisors, increased interincisal angle, hypodivergent, normal vertical growth pattern, and a short face tendency, normal mandibular angle, and balanced facial profile. Conclusions: The observed cephalometric differences between Class I, II and III malocclusions provide clinically relevant markers in vertical, sagittal, and dental dimensions that may provide descriptive reference data for similar orthodontic clinical samples.