scholarly journals Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of Class II malocclusion: A single-center, randomized controlled trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinni Arora ◽  
Rekha Sharma ◽  
Sonal Chowdhary
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Patient Comfort ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Mandibular Molar ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Functional Appliances ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of PowerScope and Forsus in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion. Materials and Methods: This was a 2-arm parallel, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. A total of 28 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients indicated for treatment with fixed functional appliances were randomized and equally divided (n = 14) among PowerScope (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, Wis; mean age 14.11 ± 1.3 years) and Forsus (3M Unitek Corp, Monrovia, Calif; mean age 15.5 ± 1.1 years) groups. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of PowerScope and Forsus were compared. The secondary outcomes were evaluation of patient comfort and operator convenience. Randomization was accomplished with a 1:1 allocation ratio, and concealment was achieved by sealed opaque envelopes. The participants and data collectors were all blinded to study group allocation. Data were analyzed for 26 patients, 13 in each group, as one patient from each group discontinued treatment. Statistical comparisons were carried out using Student's t-tests and chi square tests (P ≤ .05). Results: A significantly greater mesial mandibular movement and improvement in sagittal skeletal relation were found in the Forsus patients (P ≤ .05). The forward movement of the mandibular molar and incisors were greater in the PowerScope patients (2.3 mm and 2.80 mm) than in the Forsus patients (1.9 mm and 2.38 mm). Conclusions: Both PowerScope and Forsus are effective in correcting Class II malocclusion. The percentage of dentoalveolar effects in correcting Class II malocclusion is more for PowerScope when compared with Forsus. Patient comfort was the same with both appliances. This trial was registered.

scholarly journals A comparison between two lingual orthodontic brackets in terms of speech performance and patients' acceptance in correcting Class II, Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 80-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samiha Haj-Younis ◽  
Tarek Z. Khattab ◽  
Mohammad Y. Hajeer ◽  
Hassan Farah
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Sound Production ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Speech Performance ◽  
Lingual Brackets ◽  
Patients Acceptance ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare speech performance and levels of oral impairment between two types of lingual brackets. Methods: A parallel-group randomized controlled trial was carried out on patients with Class II, Division 1 malocclusion treated at the University of Hama School of Dentistry in Hama, Syria. A total of 46 participants (mean age: 22.3 ± 2.3 years) with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion were randomly distributed into two groups with 23 patients each (1:1 allocation ratio). Either STb (Ormco) or 7th Generation (Ormco) lingual brackets were applied. Fricative sound/s/ spectrograms were analyzed directly before intervention (T0), one week following premolar extraction prior to bracket placement (T1), within 24 hours of bracket bonding (T2), one month after (T3), and three months after (T4) bracket placement. Patients′ acceptance was assessed by means of standardized questionnaires. Results: After bracket placement, significant deterioration in articulation was recorded at all assessment times in the 7th Generation group, and up to T3 in the STb group. Significant intergroup differences were detected at T2 and T3. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in reported tongue irritation levels, whereas chewing difficulty was significantly higher in the 7th Generation group one month after bracket placement. Conclusions: 7th Generation brackets have more interaction with sound production than STb ones. Although patients in both groups complained of some degree of oral impairment, STb appliances appeared to be more comfortable than the 7th Generation ones, particularly within the first month of treatment.

Early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Kallunki ◽  
Lars Bondemark ◽  
Liselotte Paulsson
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Early Treatment ◽  
Untreated Control ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Summary Objectives To compare early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet with untreated control subjects in terms of the primary outcomes overjet and overbite as well as the effect regarding oral-health-related quality of life (OHRQoL), lip closure, incidence of trauma, and skeletal changes. Trial design Two-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial. Material and methods A total of 60 children (mean age 9.5 years) presenting a Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet were recruited. The trial was designed as intention-to-treat and the participants randomized by an independent person not involved in the trial to either early treatment with headgear activator or to an untreated control group (UG). Dental and skeletal variables as well as registrations of OHRQoL, lip closure, and incidence of trauma were recorded. For the treatment group, data were registered at baseline before treatment and when treatment was finished, corresponding to approximately 2 years. For the UG, registrations were made at baseline and at 11 years of age. Observers were blinded to treatment allocation when assessing outcomes. Results Early treatment with headgear activator significantly decreased overjet and improved molar relationship when compared with untreated controls. The effects were primarily due to dentoalveolar changes. Early treatment had no evident effect regarding OHRQoL, lip closure, or incidence of trauma. Lack of cooperation resulted in unsuccessful treatments for 27% of the patients. Limitations The trial was a single-centre trial and can thus be less generalizable. Conclusions The main treatment effect of early headgear activator treatment of Class II malocclusion with excessive overjet is reduction of overjet. Trial registration NCT04508322.

scholarly journals Comparison of effects of cervical headgear treatment on skeletal facial changes when the treatment time is altered: a randomized controlled trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 631-640
Author(s):  
Johanna Julku ◽  
Kirsi Pirilä-Parkkinen ◽  
Mimmi Tolvanen ◽  
Pertti Pirttiniemi
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Gonial Angle ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Face Height ◽  
Upper Face ◽  
Facial Changes

Summary Background There is a lack of evidence based on longitudinal information in the field of Class II malocclusion management with cervical headgear (CH), especially in a randomized setting. Objectives The main objective of this study was to evaluate skeletal facial changes, particularly in vertical dimensions, after Kloehn-type CH treatment in children when the timing of treatment is altered. Trial design Prospective, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. Methods Screened children with Class II malocclusion were randomized in 1:1 ratio to two groups of equal size by sealed-envelope randomization: the early group (EG), where active CH treatment was started at the age of 7.8 years, and the late group (LG), where CH treatment was started at the age of 9.5 years. The active treatment was continued until normal Class I occlusion on first molars was achieved. Cephalograms were taken at three different time points. Changes in cephalometric measurements were compared between groups and genders. Blinding was applicable for outcome evaluation. Results Of 67 randomized children, 56 completed the study. Upper face height increased during the CH treatment phase, as the parameter N–ANS increased significantly during the active treatments of EG (P < 0.05) and LG (P < 0.05). Also, the parameter NSL–PL increased significantly during the treatment of EG (P < 0.01) and during the treatment of LG (P < 0.01). The Gonial angle decreased significantly in the early CH treatment group compared to the later treatment group (T0–T2: P < 0.01). CH improved the antero-posterior jaw relationship. No harms were encountered. Conclusions Although the upper face height increased, the mandible showed anterior rotation after CH treatment. The Gonial angle was significantly decreased in the EG compared to the LG. There were gender-specific differences in both sagittal and vertical dimensions when examining interrelations in dimensional changes. The differences found between the early and later treatment groups were not clinically important when the cephalometric results are considered. Clinical registration ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02010346).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document