Perceptions, Practices, and Challenges of Interceptive Orthodontics Among Indian Pediatric Dentists: A...

Background Interceptive orthodontics in the primary and mixed dentitions can reduce the severity of developing malocclusions and simplify later comprehensive treatment. Pediatric dentists are ideally placed to recognize early malocclusion and initiate or coordinate interceptive care, yet data on how they perceive and implement interceptive orthodontics in India are limited. Aim This study aimed to evaluate Indian pediatric dentists' perceptions, clinical practices, and perceived barriers related to interceptive orthodontics. Materials and methods A descriptive, questionnaire-based, cross-sectional survey was conducted among pediatric dentists across India (July-October 2025). A self-administered, validated online questionnaire assessed sociodemographic details, awareness, and perceptions of interceptive orthodontics, clinical practice patterns, and perceived barriers and training needs. The survey link was circulated via professional networks, alumni mailing lists, and social media platforms. Data from 204 (100.0%) complete responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to explore associations between respondent characteristics and routine provision of interceptive orthodontics. Results Most respondents were affiliated with academic institutions (159 (77.9%)) and routinely provided interceptive orthodontic treatment (159 (77.9%)). Habit-breaking appliances (159 (78.0%)) and space maintainers (148 (72.5%)) were the most commonly used modalities, mainly for habit-related problems, space maintenance, crossbites, and early crowding. Exactly 102 (50.0%) respondents strongly agreed, and 79 (38.7%) agreed that interceptive treatment reduces the complexity of subsequent orthodontic care; 102 (50.0%) perceived it as cost-effective, while 90 (44.2%) felt cost-effectiveness was case dependent. Key barriers (multiple responses permitted) included lack of parental understanding (128 (62.7%)), compliance issues (118 (57.8%)), difficulty managing child cooperation (116 (56.9%)), and treatment cost (91 (44.6%)). Most pediatric dentists reported being very or moderately satisfied with interceptive outcomes (102 (50.0%) and 90 (44.2%), respectively), and 136 (66.7%) were likely to continue offering these services as a first-line option. Younger age and greater clinical experience were significantly associated with a higher likelihood of routinely providing interceptive orthodontics, with non-significant trends towards higher provision among pediatric dentists working in academic settings and among female practitioners. Conclusion Indian pediatric dentists recognize the importance of interceptive orthodontics and already provide a core set of early orthodontic services. However, gaps in parental awareness, child compliance, and structured training may limit the breadth and consistency of care. Strengthening postgraduate curricula, continuing-education opportunities, and system-level support could help translate positive attitudes into more comprehensive and equitable interceptive orthodontic care for children.