File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Treatment response to maxillary expansion and protraction

TitleTreatment response to maxillary expansion and protraction
Authors
Issue Date1996
PublisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://ejo.oxfordjournals.org/
Citation
European Journal Of Orthodontics, 1996, v. 18 n. 2, p. 151-168 How to Cite?
AbstractA prospective clinical trial was conducted to determine the skeletal and dental contributions to the correction of overjet and overbite in Class III patients. Thirty patients (12 males and 18 females with a mean age of 8.4 ± 1.7 years) were treated consecutively with protraction headgear and fixed maxillary expansion appliances. For each patient, a lateral cephalogram was taken 6 months before treatment (T0); immediately before treatment (T1); and 6 months after treatment (T2). The time period (T1-T0) represented changes due to 6 months of growth without treatment; (T2-T1) represented 6 months of growth and treatment. Each patient served as his/her own control. Cephalometric analysis described by Björk (1947) and Pancherz (1982a,b) was used. Sagittal and vertical measurements were made along the occlusal plane (OLs) and the occlusal plane perpendicular (OLp), and superimposed on the mid-sagittal cranial structure. The results revealed the following: with 6 months of treatment, all subjects were treated to Class I or overcorrected to Class I or Class II dental arch relationships. Overjet and sagittal molar relationships improved by an average of 6.2 and 4.5 mm, respectively. This was a result of 1.8 mm of forward maxillary growth, a 2.5-mm of backward movement of the mandible, a 1.7-mm of labial movement of maxillary incisors, a 0.2-mm of lingual movement of mandibular incisors, and a 0.2-mm of greater mesial movement of maxillary than mandibular molars. The mean overbite reduction was 2.6 mm. Maxillary and mandibular molars were erupted occlusally by 0.9 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The mandibular plane angle was increased by 1.5 degrees and the lower facial height by 2.9 mm. Individual variations in response to maxillary protraction was large for most of the parameters tested. Significant differences in treatment changes between male and female subjects were found only in the vertical eruption of mandibular incisors and maxillary and mandibular molars. These results demonstrate that significant overjet and overbite corrections can be obtained with 6 months of maxillary protraction in combination with a fixed expansion appliance.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/48916
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.44
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.090
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNgan, Pen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHägg, Uen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYiu, Cen_HK
dc.contributor.authorMerwin, Den_HK
dc.contributor.authorWei, SHYen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2008-06-12T06:29:36Z-
dc.date.available2008-06-12T06:29:36Z-
dc.date.issued1996en_HK
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal Of Orthodontics, 1996, v. 18 n. 2, p. 151-168en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0141-5387en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/48916-
dc.description.abstractA prospective clinical trial was conducted to determine the skeletal and dental contributions to the correction of overjet and overbite in Class III patients. Thirty patients (12 males and 18 females with a mean age of 8.4 ± 1.7 years) were treated consecutively with protraction headgear and fixed maxillary expansion appliances. For each patient, a lateral cephalogram was taken 6 months before treatment (T0); immediately before treatment (T1); and 6 months after treatment (T2). The time period (T1-T0) represented changes due to 6 months of growth without treatment; (T2-T1) represented 6 months of growth and treatment. Each patient served as his/her own control. Cephalometric analysis described by Björk (1947) and Pancherz (1982a,b) was used. Sagittal and vertical measurements were made along the occlusal plane (OLs) and the occlusal plane perpendicular (OLp), and superimposed on the mid-sagittal cranial structure. The results revealed the following: with 6 months of treatment, all subjects were treated to Class I or overcorrected to Class I or Class II dental arch relationships. Overjet and sagittal molar relationships improved by an average of 6.2 and 4.5 mm, respectively. This was a result of 1.8 mm of forward maxillary growth, a 2.5-mm of backward movement of the mandible, a 1.7-mm of labial movement of maxillary incisors, a 0.2-mm of lingual movement of mandibular incisors, and a 0.2-mm of greater mesial movement of maxillary than mandibular molars. The mean overbite reduction was 2.6 mm. Maxillary and mandibular molars were erupted occlusally by 0.9 and 1.4 mm, respectively. The mandibular plane angle was increased by 1.5 degrees and the lower facial height by 2.9 mm. Individual variations in response to maxillary protraction was large for most of the parameters tested. Significant differences in treatment changes between male and female subjects were found only in the vertical eruption of mandibular incisors and maxillary and mandibular molars. These results demonstrate that significant overjet and overbite corrections can be obtained with 6 months of maxillary protraction in combination with a fixed expansion appliance.en_HK
dc.format.extent418 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypetext/html-
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://ejo.oxfordjournals.org/en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofEuropean Journal of Orthodonticsen_HK
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subject.meshMalocclusion, Angle Class III - pathology - therapyen_HK
dc.subject.meshPalatal Expansion Technique - instrumentationen_HK
dc.subject.meshTooth Movement - instrumentationen_HK
dc.subject.meshCephalometryen_HK
dc.subject.meshExtraoral Traction Appliancesen_HK
dc.titleTreatment response to maxillary expansion and protractionen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0141-5387&volume=18&issue=2&spage=151&epage=168&date=1996&atitle=Treatment+response+to+maxillary+expansion+and+protractionen_HK
dc.identifier.emailHägg, U:euohagg@hkusua.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailYiu, C:ckyyiu@hkucc.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHägg, U=rp00020en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityYiu, C=rp00018en_HK
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_versionen_HK
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ejo/18.1.151en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid8670927-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0030116499en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros10759-
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0030116499&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume18en_HK
dc.identifier.issue2en_HK
dc.identifier.spage151en_HK
dc.identifier.epage168en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:A1996UL76100006-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridNgan, P=7006250823en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHägg, U=7006790279en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYiu, C=7007115156en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridMerwin, D=16683389900en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWei, SHY=7401765260en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats