File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Treatment effects of simple fixed appliance and reverse headgear in correction of anterior crossbites.

TitleTreatment effects of simple fixed appliance and reverse headgear in correction of anterior crossbites.
Authors
Issue Date2000
PublisherMosby, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ajodo
Citation
American Journal Of Orthodontics And Dentofacial Orthopedics : Official Publication Of The American Association Of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, And The American Board Of Orthodontics, 2000, v. 117 n. 6, p. 691-699 How to Cite?
AbstractThe aim of this study was to compare the skeletal and dental changes contributing to the correction of Class III malocclusion using a 2 x 4 appliance and reverse headgear in the mixed dentition. Seventeen consecutive patients (mean age, 9.7 years) with pseudo-Class III malocclusions and an anterior functional shift and straight or concave facial profile were treated with a simple fixed appliance. Another 20 consecutive patients (mean age, 8.5 years) with Class III incisor relationship and straight or concave facial profiles, were treated with reverse headgear. Lateral cephalometric films taken at the beginning of treatment, the end of the treatment, and 1 year after the active treatment, were analyzed with the modified Pancherz analysis. After active treatment, the overjet correction, 5.2 mm and 6.5 mm on average, respectively, were achieved using the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear. The overjet correction by the 2 x 4 appliance was due to dental changes only. In the reverse headgear group, 60% of the overjet correction was due to dental changes and 40% due to skeletal changes. During the 12 months follow-up period, the overjet was unchanged in the 2 x 4 group (1.6 mm) and decreased in the reverse headgear group, the difference being statistically significant (P <.05). The change of jaw relationship was similar between the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear groups. During the follow-up period, a decrease in overjet in the reverse headgear group was mainly due to forward growth of the mandible and proclination of lower incisors. The overjet in the 2 x 4 group was unchanged due to dental compensation (1.6 mm). To conclude there was a similar amount of overjet correction in the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear groups. Overjet correction by the simple fixed appliance was produced by dental changes whereas in the reverse headgear group, it was produced by both dental and skeletal changes.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154106
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.69
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.249
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorGu, Yen_US
dc.contributor.authorRabie, ABen_US
dc.contributor.authorHagg, Uen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:23:17Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:23:17Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_US
dc.identifier.citationAmerican Journal Of Orthodontics And Dentofacial Orthopedics : Official Publication Of The American Association Of Orthodontists, Its Constituent Societies, And The American Board Of Orthodontics, 2000, v. 117 n. 6, p. 691-699en_US
dc.identifier.issn0889-5406en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154106-
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to compare the skeletal and dental changes contributing to the correction of Class III malocclusion using a 2 x 4 appliance and reverse headgear in the mixed dentition. Seventeen consecutive patients (mean age, 9.7 years) with pseudo-Class III malocclusions and an anterior functional shift and straight or concave facial profile were treated with a simple fixed appliance. Another 20 consecutive patients (mean age, 8.5 years) with Class III incisor relationship and straight or concave facial profiles, were treated with reverse headgear. Lateral cephalometric films taken at the beginning of treatment, the end of the treatment, and 1 year after the active treatment, were analyzed with the modified Pancherz analysis. After active treatment, the overjet correction, 5.2 mm and 6.5 mm on average, respectively, were achieved using the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear. The overjet correction by the 2 x 4 appliance was due to dental changes only. In the reverse headgear group, 60% of the overjet correction was due to dental changes and 40% due to skeletal changes. During the 12 months follow-up period, the overjet was unchanged in the 2 x 4 group (1.6 mm) and decreased in the reverse headgear group, the difference being statistically significant (P <.05). The change of jaw relationship was similar between the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear groups. During the follow-up period, a decrease in overjet in the reverse headgear group was mainly due to forward growth of the mandible and proclination of lower incisors. The overjet in the 2 x 4 group was unchanged due to dental compensation (1.6 mm). To conclude there was a similar amount of overjet correction in the 2 x 4 and reverse headgear groups. Overjet correction by the simple fixed appliance was produced by dental changes whereas in the reverse headgear group, it was produced by both dental and skeletal changes.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherMosby, Inc. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ajodoen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAmerican journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodonticsen_US
dc.rightsAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Copyright © Mosby, Inc.-
dc.subject.meshCephalometryen_US
dc.subject.meshChilden_US
dc.subject.meshDentition, Mixeden_US
dc.subject.meshExtraoral Traction Appliancesen_US
dc.subject.meshFacial Bones - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshFollow-Up Studiesen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshIncisor - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMalocclusion, Angle Class Iii - Pathology - Therapyen_US
dc.subject.meshMandible - Growth & Development - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshMaxilla - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshOrthodontic Appliancesen_US
dc.subject.meshRecurrenceen_US
dc.subject.meshStatistics As Topicen_US
dc.subject.meshTooth Movement - Instrumentationen_US
dc.subject.meshTreatment Outcomeen_US
dc.titleTreatment effects of simple fixed appliance and reverse headgear in correction of anterior crossbites.en_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailRabie, AB:rabie@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.emailHagg, U:euohagg@hkusua.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityRabie, AB=rp00029en_US
dc.identifier.authorityHagg, U=rp00020en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0889-5406(00)70178-8-
dc.identifier.pmid10842112-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0034197973en_US
dc.identifier.hkuros49448-
dc.identifier.volume117en_US
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.spage691en_US
dc.identifier.epage699en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000087628600009-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGu, Y=7403046201en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRabie, AB=7007172734en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHagg, U=7006790279en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats