{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01546738399462004, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0020174848688634837, 'mean_word_length': 5.526315789473684, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Management of Unerupted Maxillary Canines where no Orthodontic Treatment is Planned; a Survey of UK Consultant Opinion

Objective To assess current consultant opinion on the management of impacted maxillary canines in patients for whom no orthodontic treatment is planned. Design Questionnaire survey. Method Questionnaires were sent to all UK consultant orthodontists identified from the Consultant Orthodontists Group database. Follow-up questionnaires were sent to those who had not replied within 6 weeks. An overall response rate of 76% was achieved. Results Most consultants were in favor of intervention, with removal of the unerupted canine, although a significant minority suggested a conservative approach. Of the latter group, nearly all recommended radiographic monitoring, but there was little agreement regarding the frequency and duration of this. The risk of root resorption was stated to be the most important factor justifying monitoring. Conclusions Significant variation was found amongst UK consultant orthodontists with regard to the management of impacted canines, where orthodontic treatment was not planned. The clinical and radiographic features, which the respondents stated would influence their decision to remove or leave the canine, were not those that existing research suggests as being the primary risk factors. It is suggested that, once the patient has passed the peak age for initiation of resorption, a more conservative approach may be appropriate.