Jeryl English - Academia.edu (original) (raw)
Papers by Jeryl English
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2011
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2019
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dec 1, 2020
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research, Apr 23, 2023
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Jun 1, 2019
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Feb 1, 2019
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mar 1, 2021
PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the validity of orthognathic surgery guidelines us... more PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the validity of orthognathic surgery guidelines used by the major American medical insurance companies.Materials and MethodsThis study assessed the validity of the orthognathic surgery guidelines used by Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS), Cigna, Humana, and UnitedHealthcare (UHC). To evaluate the validity, we calculated the approval and denial rates of the 5 guidelines when we used them to assess the medical necessity for a control group of carefully selected patients. Patients were included in the control group if they met the criteria of a 'prudent provider,' crafted for this study. All rejected cases were analyzed to determine the root cause of the denials. The validity of the guidelines was also ascertained by determining their completeness and correctness.ResultsThe current study proves that no insurance guideline is in agreement with the criteria of a 'prudent provider'. When applied to carefully chosen patients, the requirements of BCBS, Aetna, Humana, and Cigna produce modest rejection rates of 6-12%. UHC is an outlier. Its guideline rejects 86% of patients, a rate about 7 times higher than its peers. Insurance guidelines disqualified patients for 3 different reasons: (1) no significant jaw deformity, (2) no demonstrable health impairment, and (3) the etiology of the condition is not a covered benefit. Additional evaluations demonstrate that the private insurance guidelines are incomplete and, at times ,incorrect.ConclusionThis study shows that the orthognathic surgery guidelines used by the major American medical insurance plans need revision. The most consequential flaw was considering etiology in judging medical necessity. Fortunately, only one company adopted this policy. Moreover, all guidelines have omissions and errors in the way jaw deformity is determined and how health impairment is determined.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2021
INTRODUCTION Computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems have assisted orthodontist... more INTRODUCTION Computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems have assisted orthodontists to position brackets virtually. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if a CAD-CAM system could predict the orthodontic treatment outcome of patients with Angle Class I malocclusion with mild crowding or spacing and with no need for orthodontic extraction. METHODS Using the American Board of Orthodontics Cast-Radiograph Evaluation (ABO-CRE) and color map superimposition, the treated occlusion was compared with the virtual final occlusion of 24 young adults with Class I occlusion. Using eXceed software (eXceed, Witten, Germany), we created the final occlusion prediction for each patient (virtual set up group). A digital model of the final occlusion of each patient was created (treated occlusion group). ABO-CRE score was used to compare groups. In addition, a color map was created for all subjects to access the mean and range values between the virtual set up model and treated occlusion model of each patient. Random and systematic errors were calculated. In addition, chi-square and t test were used. RESULTS Comparisons between virtual set up occlusion and treated occlusion showed statistically significant differences in 3 out of 7 measurements: interproximal contact score was larger for treated than virtual occlusion (0.45 mm and 0.04 mm, respectively), and the treated occlusion showed larger values than the virtual occlusion for occlusal contacts (14.13 mm and 7.62 mm, respectively) and overjet (7.37 mm and 0.66 mm, respectively). Although the treated occlusion showed a larger score than the virtual occlusion (50.41 mm and 34.58 mm, respectively), there is no significant difference between both. Root angulation decreased (from 1.95 ± 1.29 to 0.65 ± 0.71) because of the treatment. CONCLUSIONS ABO-CRE overall score presents no difference between groups. In addition, CAD-CAM setup occlusion closely predicts the final teeth alignment and leveling with interarch relationships showing less ABO-CRE score deduction.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, May 1, 2020
Purpose:Digital dental alignment is not readily available to automatically articulate the upper a... more Purpose:Digital dental alignment is not readily available to automatically articulate the upper and lower models. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of our newly developed 3-stage automatic digital articulation approach by comparing it to the gold standard of orthodontist-articulated occlusion.Materials and methods:Thirty pairs of stone dental models from double-jaw orthognathic surgery patients who had undergone a one-piece Le Fort I osteotomy were used. Two experienced orthodontists together, hand articulated the models to their perceived final occlusion for surgery. Each pair of the models was then scanned twice: while they were in orthodontist-determined occlusion, and while the upper and lower models were separated and positioned randomly. The separately scanned models were automatically articulated to the final occlusion using our 3-stage algorithm, resulting in an algorithm-articulated occlusion (experimental group). The models scanned together represented the hand-articulated occlusion (control group). The qualitative evaluation was completed using a 3-point categorical scale by the same orthodontists, who were blinded from the methods used to articulate the models. A quantitative evaluation was also completed to determine whether there was a difference in midline, canine and molar relationship between the algorithm- and hand-articulated occlusions using repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Finally, means and standard deviations were used to present the differences between the 2 methods.Results:The results of the qualitative evaluation revealed that all the algorithm-articulated occlusions were as good as the hand-articulated ones. The results of repeated measures ANOVA showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two methods (F(1,28)=0.03, P=0.87). The mean differences between the two methods were all within 0.2mm.Conclusions:The results of our study have demonstrated that the dental models can be accurately, reliably and automatically articulated using our 3-stage algorithm approach to the standards of orthodontists.
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, Feb 25, 2020
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Apr 1, 2018
Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, Sep 1, 2010
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2022
Digital dental articulation for three-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery is challenging. The pu... more Digital dental articulation for three-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery is challenging. The purpose of this proof-of-concept study was to evaluate the clinical feasibility of a newly developed mathematical algorithm to digitally establish the final occlusion for three-piece maxillary surgery. Five patients with jaw deformities who had undergone a three-piece double-jaw surgery that was planned virtually were randomly selected for this study. The final occlusion had been hand-articulated using stone casts, scanned into the computer and used in the surgery. These hand-articulated occlusions served as the control group. To form the experimental group, the three-piece maxillary dental arch was articulated again automatically from the patient's original occlusion using the mathematical algorithm. The hand- and algorithm-articulated occlusions were then evaluated qualitatively by two experienced orthodontists. A quantitative evaluation was also performed. The results of the qualitative evaluation showed that all of the three-piece occlusions, hand- and algorithm-articulated, were clinically acceptable based on the American Board of Orthodontics grading system. When compared, two of the algorithm-articulated occlusions were clearly better (40%), one was the same (20%), and two were slightly worse (40%) than the hand-articulated occlusions. All of the quantitative measurements were comparable between the two articulation methods. In conclusion, the results of this study demonstrate that it is clinically feasible to digitally articulate the three-piece maxillary arch to the intact mandibular dental arch.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2021
A facial reference frame is a 3-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system that includes 3 perpendic... more A facial reference frame is a 3-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system that includes 3 perpendicular planes: midsagittal, axial, and coronal. The order in which one defines the planes matters. The purposes of this study are to determine the following: 1) what sequence (axial-midsagittal-coronal vs midsagittal-axial-coronal) produced more appropriate reference frames and 2) whether orbital or auricular dystopia influenced the outcomes. This study is an ambispective cross-sectional study. Fifty-four subjects with facial asymmetry were included. The facial reference frames of each subject (outcome variable) were constructed using 2 methods (independent variable): axial plane first and midsagittal plane first. Two board-certified orthodontists together blindly evaluated the results using a 3-point categorical scale based on their careful inspection and expert intuition. The covariant for stratification was the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia. Finally, Wilcoxon signed rank tests were performed. The facial reference frames defined by the midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly different from ones defined by the axial plane first method (P = .001). Using the midsagittal plane first method, the reference frames were more appropriately defined in 22 (40.7%) subjects, equivalent in 26 (48.1%) and less appropriately defined in 6 (11.1%). After stratified by orbital or auricular dystopia, the results also showed that the reference frame computed using midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly more appropriate in both subject groups regardless of the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia (27 with orbital or auricular dystopia and 27 without, both P < .05). The midsagittal plane first sequence improves the facial reference frames compared with the traditional axial plane first approach. However, regardless of the sequence used, clinicians need to judge the correctness of the reference frame before diagnosis or surgical planning.
Orthodontic Science and Practice, 2019
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2019
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2017
PubMed, Apr 1, 1998
This study describes mesial and distal enamel thickness of the permanent posterior mandibular den... more This study describes mesial and distal enamel thickness of the permanent posterior mandibular dentition. The sample comprised 98 Caucasian adults (59 males, 39 females) 20 to 35 years old. Bitewing radiographs of the right permanent mandibular premolars and first and second molars were illuminated and transferred to a computer at a fixed magnification via a video camera. Enamel and dentin thicknesses were identified and digitized on the plane representing the maximum mesiodistal diameter of each tooth. The results showed that there were no significant sex differences in either mesial or distal enamel thickness. Enamel on the second molars was significantly thicker (0.3 to 0.4 mm) than enamel on the premolars. Distal enamel was significantly thicker than mesial enamel. There was approximately 10 mm of total enamel on the four teeth combined. Assuming 50% enamel reduction, the premolars and molars should provide 9.8 mm of additional space for realignment of mandibular teeth.
Seminars in Orthodontics, Sep 1, 2002
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, 2021
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2011
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2019
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Dec 1, 2020
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research, Apr 23, 2023
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Jun 1, 2019
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Feb 1, 2019
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Mar 1, 2021
PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the validity of orthognathic surgery guidelines us... more PurposeThe purpose of this study was to assess the validity of orthognathic surgery guidelines used by the major American medical insurance companies.Materials and MethodsThis study assessed the validity of the orthognathic surgery guidelines used by Aetna, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS), Cigna, Humana, and UnitedHealthcare (UHC). To evaluate the validity, we calculated the approval and denial rates of the 5 guidelines when we used them to assess the medical necessity for a control group of carefully selected patients. Patients were included in the control group if they met the criteria of a 'prudent provider,' crafted for this study. All rejected cases were analyzed to determine the root cause of the denials. The validity of the guidelines was also ascertained by determining their completeness and correctness.ResultsThe current study proves that no insurance guideline is in agreement with the criteria of a 'prudent provider'. When applied to carefully chosen patients, the requirements of BCBS, Aetna, Humana, and Cigna produce modest rejection rates of 6-12%. UHC is an outlier. Its guideline rejects 86% of patients, a rate about 7 times higher than its peers. Insurance guidelines disqualified patients for 3 different reasons: (1) no significant jaw deformity, (2) no demonstrable health impairment, and (3) the etiology of the condition is not a covered benefit. Additional evaluations demonstrate that the private insurance guidelines are incomplete and, at times ,incorrect.ConclusionThis study shows that the orthognathic surgery guidelines used by the major American medical insurance plans need revision. The most consequential flaw was considering etiology in judging medical necessity. Fortunately, only one company adopted this policy. Moreover, all guidelines have omissions and errors in the way jaw deformity is determined and how health impairment is determined.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2021
INTRODUCTION Computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems have assisted orthodontist... more INTRODUCTION Computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD-CAM) systems have assisted orthodontists to position brackets virtually. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if a CAD-CAM system could predict the orthodontic treatment outcome of patients with Angle Class I malocclusion with mild crowding or spacing and with no need for orthodontic extraction. METHODS Using the American Board of Orthodontics Cast-Radiograph Evaluation (ABO-CRE) and color map superimposition, the treated occlusion was compared with the virtual final occlusion of 24 young adults with Class I occlusion. Using eXceed software (eXceed, Witten, Germany), we created the final occlusion prediction for each patient (virtual set up group). A digital model of the final occlusion of each patient was created (treated occlusion group). ABO-CRE score was used to compare groups. In addition, a color map was created for all subjects to access the mean and range values between the virtual set up model and treated occlusion model of each patient. Random and systematic errors were calculated. In addition, chi-square and t test were used. RESULTS Comparisons between virtual set up occlusion and treated occlusion showed statistically significant differences in 3 out of 7 measurements: interproximal contact score was larger for treated than virtual occlusion (0.45 mm and 0.04 mm, respectively), and the treated occlusion showed larger values than the virtual occlusion for occlusal contacts (14.13 mm and 7.62 mm, respectively) and overjet (7.37 mm and 0.66 mm, respectively). Although the treated occlusion showed a larger score than the virtual occlusion (50.41 mm and 34.58 mm, respectively), there is no significant difference between both. Root angulation decreased (from 1.95 ± 1.29 to 0.65 ± 0.71) because of the treatment. CONCLUSIONS ABO-CRE overall score presents no difference between groups. In addition, CAD-CAM setup occlusion closely predicts the final teeth alignment and leveling with interarch relationships showing less ABO-CRE score deduction.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, May 1, 2020
Purpose:Digital dental alignment is not readily available to automatically articulate the upper a... more Purpose:Digital dental alignment is not readily available to automatically articulate the upper and lower models. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of our newly developed 3-stage automatic digital articulation approach by comparing it to the gold standard of orthodontist-articulated occlusion.Materials and methods:Thirty pairs of stone dental models from double-jaw orthognathic surgery patients who had undergone a one-piece Le Fort I osteotomy were used. Two experienced orthodontists together, hand articulated the models to their perceived final occlusion for surgery. Each pair of the models was then scanned twice: while they were in orthodontist-determined occlusion, and while the upper and lower models were separated and positioned randomly. The separately scanned models were automatically articulated to the final occlusion using our 3-stage algorithm, resulting in an algorithm-articulated occlusion (experimental group). The models scanned together represented the hand-articulated occlusion (control group). The qualitative evaluation was completed using a 3-point categorical scale by the same orthodontists, who were blinded from the methods used to articulate the models. A quantitative evaluation was also completed to determine whether there was a difference in midline, canine and molar relationship between the algorithm- and hand-articulated occlusions using repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Finally, means and standard deviations were used to present the differences between the 2 methods.Results:The results of the qualitative evaluation revealed that all the algorithm-articulated occlusions were as good as the hand-articulated ones. The results of repeated measures ANOVA showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two methods (F(1,28)=0.03, P=0.87). The mean differences between the two methods were all within 0.2mm.Conclusions:The results of our study have demonstrated that the dental models can be accurately, reliably and automatically articulated using our 3-stage algorithm approach to the standards of orthodontists.
International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, Feb 25, 2020
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Apr 1, 2018
Journal of Craniofacial Surgery, Sep 1, 2010
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2022
Digital dental articulation for three-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery is challenging. The pu... more Digital dental articulation for three-piece maxillary orthognathic surgery is challenging. The purpose of this proof-of-concept study was to evaluate the clinical feasibility of a newly developed mathematical algorithm to digitally establish the final occlusion for three-piece maxillary surgery. Five patients with jaw deformities who had undergone a three-piece double-jaw surgery that was planned virtually were randomly selected for this study. The final occlusion had been hand-articulated using stone casts, scanned into the computer and used in the surgery. These hand-articulated occlusions served as the control group. To form the experimental group, the three-piece maxillary dental arch was articulated again automatically from the patient's original occlusion using the mathematical algorithm. The hand- and algorithm-articulated occlusions were then evaluated qualitatively by two experienced orthodontists. A quantitative evaluation was also performed. The results of the qualitative evaluation showed that all of the three-piece occlusions, hand- and algorithm-articulated, were clinically acceptable based on the American Board of Orthodontics grading system. When compared, two of the algorithm-articulated occlusions were clearly better (40%), one was the same (20%), and two were slightly worse (40%) than the hand-articulated occlusions. All of the quantitative measurements were comparable between the two articulation methods. In conclusion, the results of this study demonstrate that it is clinically feasible to digitally articulate the three-piece maxillary arch to the intact mandibular dental arch.
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2021
A facial reference frame is a 3-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system that includes 3 perpendic... more A facial reference frame is a 3-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system that includes 3 perpendicular planes: midsagittal, axial, and coronal. The order in which one defines the planes matters. The purposes of this study are to determine the following: 1) what sequence (axial-midsagittal-coronal vs midsagittal-axial-coronal) produced more appropriate reference frames and 2) whether orbital or auricular dystopia influenced the outcomes. This study is an ambispective cross-sectional study. Fifty-four subjects with facial asymmetry were included. The facial reference frames of each subject (outcome variable) were constructed using 2 methods (independent variable): axial plane first and midsagittal plane first. Two board-certified orthodontists together blindly evaluated the results using a 3-point categorical scale based on their careful inspection and expert intuition. The covariant for stratification was the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia. Finally, Wilcoxon signed rank tests were performed. The facial reference frames defined by the midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly different from ones defined by the axial plane first method (P = .001). Using the midsagittal plane first method, the reference frames were more appropriately defined in 22 (40.7%) subjects, equivalent in 26 (48.1%) and less appropriately defined in 6 (11.1%). After stratified by orbital or auricular dystopia, the results also showed that the reference frame computed using midsagittal plane first method was statistically significantly more appropriate in both subject groups regardless of the existence of orbital or auricular dystopia (27 with orbital or auricular dystopia and 27 without, both P < .05). The midsagittal plane first sequence improves the facial reference frames compared with the traditional axial plane first approach. However, regardless of the sequence used, clinicians need to judge the correctness of the reference frame before diagnosis or surgical planning.
Orthodontic Science and Practice, 2019
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 2019
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2017
PubMed, Apr 1, 1998
This study describes mesial and distal enamel thickness of the permanent posterior mandibular den... more This study describes mesial and distal enamel thickness of the permanent posterior mandibular dentition. The sample comprised 98 Caucasian adults (59 males, 39 females) 20 to 35 years old. Bitewing radiographs of the right permanent mandibular premolars and first and second molars were illuminated and transferred to a computer at a fixed magnification via a video camera. Enamel and dentin thicknesses were identified and digitized on the plane representing the maximum mesiodistal diameter of each tooth. The results showed that there were no significant sex differences in either mesial or distal enamel thickness. Enamel on the second molars was significantly thicker (0.3 to 0.4 mm) than enamel on the premolars. Distal enamel was significantly thicker than mesial enamel. There was approximately 10 mm of total enamel on the four teeth combined. Assuming 50% enamel reduction, the premolars and molars should provide 9.8 mm of additional space for realignment of mandibular teeth.
Seminars in Orthodontics, Sep 1, 2002
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, 2021