New evidence does not always come with a clear answer about what should change. When research, technology, or clinical thinking raises new questions, orthodontists have a duty to determine what is relevant to the specialty.
AAO monitors ever-changing developments and brings together the expertise needed to evaluate them, so individual orthodontists do not have to take on that work alone.
Revisiting Guidance as Evidence Changes
That work is underway now in sleep-disordered breathing, where research and clinical thinking continue to evolve.
The AAO has established a new seven-member Sleep-Disordered Breathing Task Force to examine emerging research and challenges to AAO’s current position. The group will bring together orthodontic and medical experts, collaborate with other organizations, monitor developments in the broader conversation, and recommend how AAO policies and clinical resources should evolve.
For members, the value is not simply that a task force exists, but that the AAO is maintaining a formal process for following the issue over time, bringing the right expertise together, and determining whether new evidence warrants a change in existing guidance.
That collective review means individual orthodontists do not have to independently sort through every new study or differing perspective to determine what it may mean for the specialty. Whether the outcome means updated guidance, confirmation that an existing position remains sound, or recognition that more evidence is needed before a change is warranted, members can feel confident in a thorough review process.
Establishing Guidance for New Technology
Artificial intelligence is another example of AAO putting that process to work.
As AI-enabled tools became more prevalent in orthodontics, AAO convened a Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in Orthodontics to examine issues including clinical oversight, patient safety, transparency, accountability, and professional responsibility.
Its position paper, Responsible Integration of Artificial Intelligence in Orthodontic Clinical Practice, provides a framework for the responsible development, implementation, and oversight of AI technologies in orthodontic care.
The framework reinforces the orthodontist’s role as the informed final decision-maker in patient care and addresses patient safety, ethical adoption, transparency, and professional accountability.
Rather than leaving individual orthodontists to establish those boundaries independently, members have a knowledge foundation developed specifically for orthodontic practice and informed by the expertise AAO brought together.
Reviewing Existing Guidance, Too
AAO also regularly revisits guidance that is already in place.
Clinical Practice Guidelines are reviewed every two years using relevant clinical and scientific literature, the expertise of orthodontic educators, and the experience of practicing orthodontists. That review allows the AAO to consider whether existing recommendations still reflect current evidence and clinical realities.
New research may strengthen an existing recommendation, point to a need for revision, or show that more evidence is necessary. Regular review helps ensure that guidance does not remain unchanged simply because it has already been established.
Guidance Members Do Not Have to Build Alone
Clinical judgment ultimately remains with the orthodontist. AAO guidance does not replace an orthodontist’s responsibility to evaluate the evidence, consider the individual patient, and make informed treatment decisions.
What the AAO can provide is the work that is much harder to stay on top of individually: monitoring developments over time, recognizing when an issue warrants deeper examination, bringing together expertise from the appropriate disciplines, and revisiting guidance as knowledge evolves.
Member orthodontists, researchers, educators, and other experts contribute through task forces, committees, and working groups, while the AAO provides the structure and continuity that allow that work to continue as new questions emerge.
Much of this work may happen outside members’ immediate view. Its value becomes clearer when an issue is changing or the evidence is not yet settled. AAO members have the benefit of guidance informed by current evidence, relevant expertise, and the realities of orthodontic care rather than having to wrestle with those questions entirely on their own.
