Mixed Dentition Analysis
On this page
Direct answer
Between eight and eleven years the canines and premolars are still in bone, so a mixed dentition analysis predicts their widths instead of measuring them, telling you whether the arch will accommodate the erupting teeth or whether interception — serial extraction, space maintenance or arch development — should begin now. Moyers' method reads predicted canine-plus-premolar widths from probability tables keyed to the summed widths of the four mandibular incisors (the 75th percentile is the recommended, slightly cautious level); Tanaka and Johnston replace the tables with arithmetic — one half of the mandibular incisor sum, plus 0.5 mm for each mandibular quadrant and 1.0 mm for each maxillary quadrant; Hixon and Oldfather combine incisor measurements with radiographic premolar widths. Each method trades precision for convenience, and all exist because the decision they inform cannot wait for the teeth to erupt.
What you must remember
- What is predicted: the mesiodistal width of the unerupted canine, first and second premolar in each quadrant, compared with the space available distal to the mandibular incisors.
- Why the mandibular incisors: they are erupted and measurable early, and correlate best with canine and premolar widths across populations.
- Moyers' mixed dentition analysis: probability tables (no arithmetic at the chair), read at the 75th percentile — lower percentiles underpredict and miss crowding.
- Tanaka-Johnston: mandibular quadrant estimate = (sum of the four mandibular incisor widths ÷ 2) + 0.5 mm; maxillary quadrant = the same half-sum + 1.0 mm; no tables, no radiographs.
- Hixon-Oldfather (and its Staley-Kerber revision): the most accurate of the classic methods because it adds actual radiographic widths of the unerupted first and second premolars to incisor data.
- Nance analysis: compares the available arch length with the combined widths of the unerupted teeth plus the erupted incisors, measured on the study model with a brass wire — the analysis that also gave us the leeway space concept.
- Interpretation: predicted width exceeding available space indicates crowding to come — the number that decides between watchful waiting, space maintenance, regaining and serial extraction.
Working one prediction through
A nine-year-old with mild lower incisor crowding and early loss of a second deciduous molar needs a number before a plan. Sum the four mandibular incisors on the cast: suppose 22 mm. Tanaka-Johnston halves it to 11 mm and adds 0.5 mm, predicting 11.5 mm per mandibular quadrant of canine-plus-premolar width; Moyers' table at the 75th percentile gives a similar but slightly different figure, and the discrepancy between the two methods is itself a lesson — predictions carry confidence intervals, not decimal truth. Now measure the space actually available: a brass wire from the mesial of the first permanent molar to the distal of the lateral incisor, respecting the arch line, comes to 10 mm per side. The quadrant is short by about 1.5 mm, and the mesial drift already visible at the lost molar site makes it worse weekly — hence a lower lingual holding arch now, preserving roughly 3.4 mm of leeway space in the mandible when the deciduous molars go. Had the prediction shown 4-5 mm of deficit with a Class I pattern, the conversation would instead be Dewel's serial extraction sequence. The method is arithmetic; the judgement is growth, hygiene and timing.
How the exam and the viva test it
Theory papers ask for a "classify mixed dentition analyses" structure — the expected grouping is prediction from tables (Moyers), from equations (Tanaka-Johnston), from radiographs (Hixon-Oldfather) and from combinations (Nance) — and each method carries marks for its chairside practicality. The viva favourite is the Tanaka-Johnston arithmetic on the spot: half the incisor sum, 0.5 mm mandibular, 1.0 mm maxillary, and examiners frequently pick the maxillary constant as the trick question. The second probe is why Moyers is read at the 75th percentile — because erring toward overestimation protects against surprise crowding. Indian practical classes examine this as a spot analysis on casts with dividers, and the write-up must end in a management statement, not a number; a calculation without a plan loses the final mark.
Frequently asked questions
Which teeth are measured for Moyers' mixed dentition analysis?
The four mandibular permanent incisors, whose summed mesiodistal widths are used to read predicted canine and premolar widths from probability tables.
State the Tanaka-Johnston prediction rule.
Half the sum of the four mandibular incisor widths predicts the canine-plus-premolar width of one quadrant, with 0.5 mm added for each mandibular quadrant and 1.0 mm for each maxillary quadrant.
Why is Moyers' table read at the 75th percentile?
Because the 75th percentile slightly overestimates tooth material, providing a safety margin against unexpected crowding, whereas lower percentials underpredict.
Which mixed dentition method is most accurate, and why?
The Hixon-Oldfather method (revised by Staley and Kerber), because it combines measured incisor widths with actual radiographic premolar widths rather than relying on prediction alone.
What does a negative mixed dentition finding trigger clinically?
A space-management decision — space maintenance with a holding arch, space regaining, or serial extraction planning depending on the magnitude of the predicted deficit.