# Dewey’s Modification for Angle’s Class I Malocclusion: Revisited

## TL;DR

This study finds that Dewey's classification system for Angle's Class I malocclusion misses several other types of malocclusions, suggesting the need for modification.

## Contribution

The study identifies previously unclassified malocclusions and proposes a re-evaluation of Dewey's modification.

## Key findings

- 4% of patients had single-tooth crossbite, and 5% had crossbite in more than one tooth.
- 35% of the population showed other types of malocclusions not included in Dewey's modification.
- Single-tooth rotations were present in 9% of patients, with 6% having multiple teeth affected.

## Abstract

Introduction

Classification is a crucial communication tool between dental school professors and students, between practitioners, and between practitioners and insurance companies or government bureaucracies. The management of patients is significantly impacted by classification. Once a patient has been categorized, the practitioner will frequently use treatment strategies corresponding to that classification. The classification used by orthodontists most frequently is Dewey's version of Angle's categorization. To date, the shortcomings of Dewey’s modification were not mentioned in the literature. Various other malocclusions are still not included in this classification system that was modified by Dewey.

Aim

The aim of this study was to re-evaluate and re-establish Dewey’s modification for class I malocclusion for the various other types of malocclusions that are not included in the classification system.

Material and method

An observational study was carried out on a total of 600 patients in the Department of Orthodontics. The study duration was eight months. The photographic method was used for the evaluation of the malocclusion. Photographs were taken and clinical evaluation was done of the selected cases. The type of malocclusion was observed and recorded.

Result

The results showed that other types of malocclusions other than that of Dewey's modification are observed in the population. A total of 4% of the population was affected with single tooth crossbite and 5% were affected in more than one tooth. A total of 1% of the population was affected with single-tooth scissor bites, and in 2%, more than one tooth was involved. In 9% of the population, single-tooth rotations were present, whereas in 6%, more than one tooth was involved. A total of 35% of the population showed other types of malocclusions.

Conclusion

To conclude, various other malocclusions are present in the population suggesting a lacuna in Dewey's modification. Hence, there was a need to revisit.