File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Stepwise advancement versus maximum jumping with headgear activator

TitleStepwise advancement versus maximum jumping with headgear activator
Authors
Issue Date2007
PublisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://ejo.oxfordjournals.org/
Citation
European Journal Of Orthodontics, 2007, v. 29 n. 3, p. 283-293 How to Cite?
AbstractThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of stepwise mandibular advancement versus maximum jumping and extended treatment versus early retention. The material was obtained prospectively and consisted of lateral cephalograms taken at the start (TO), after initial (T1 ), and at the end (T2) of treatment, from two groups of consecutively treated skeletal Class II patients who had undergone therapy with headgear activators. The first headgear activator group, HGA-S (n = 24; mean age 11.9 ± 1.2 years), was treated for 13 months and had 4-mm mandibular advancement every 3 months. The second headgear activator group, HGA-M (n = 31; mean age 11.2 ± 1.5 years), had maximum jumping, 6-8 mm interincisal opening, for a total of 15.4 months, and with reduced wear for the last 6.9 months. The dropout over 12 months was 41 and 46 per cent, respectively. Pre-treatment growth changes were obtained as a reference. An independent t-test was used to determine differences in baseline dentofacial morphology between the groups, a paired t-test for intra-group comparisons, and an independent t-test to evaluate differences between the groups. The results, in both groups, showed enhanced mandibular prognathism during the initial phase (T0-T1), followed by normal growth (T1-T2), and lower face height enhancement throughout treatment (T0-T2). For both groups, the mandibular plane and occlusal angle increased, possibly enhanced by 'extrusion' of the lower molars. For both groups, maxillary forward growth was restrained only during the initial phase, but the effect remained significant at T2 for the HGA-S group. In the HGA-M group, the lower incisors were protruded, while in the HGA-S group, they were unaffected. The findings indicate that both modes of mandibular jumping resulted in skeletal and dental effects. The length of active treatment seemed to be decisive in maintaining the treatment effects; stepwise advancement had less dental effects.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66374
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.44
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.090
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWey, MCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorBendeus, Men_HK
dc.contributor.authorLi, Pen_HK
dc.contributor.authorHägg, Uen_HK
dc.contributor.authorRabie, ABMen_HK
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Wen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T05:45:49Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T05:45:49Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_HK
dc.identifier.citationEuropean Journal Of Orthodontics, 2007, v. 29 n. 3, p. 283-293en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0141-5387en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/66374-
dc.description.abstractThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of stepwise mandibular advancement versus maximum jumping and extended treatment versus early retention. The material was obtained prospectively and consisted of lateral cephalograms taken at the start (TO), after initial (T1 ), and at the end (T2) of treatment, from two groups of consecutively treated skeletal Class II patients who had undergone therapy with headgear activators. The first headgear activator group, HGA-S (n = 24; mean age 11.9 ± 1.2 years), was treated for 13 months and had 4-mm mandibular advancement every 3 months. The second headgear activator group, HGA-M (n = 31; mean age 11.2 ± 1.5 years), had maximum jumping, 6-8 mm interincisal opening, for a total of 15.4 months, and with reduced wear for the last 6.9 months. The dropout over 12 months was 41 and 46 per cent, respectively. Pre-treatment growth changes were obtained as a reference. An independent t-test was used to determine differences in baseline dentofacial morphology between the groups, a paired t-test for intra-group comparisons, and an independent t-test to evaluate differences between the groups. The results, in both groups, showed enhanced mandibular prognathism during the initial phase (T0-T1), followed by normal growth (T1-T2), and lower face height enhancement throughout treatment (T0-T2). For both groups, the mandibular plane and occlusal angle increased, possibly enhanced by 'extrusion' of the lower molars. For both groups, maxillary forward growth was restrained only during the initial phase, but the effect remained significant at T2 for the HGA-S group. In the HGA-M group, the lower incisors were protruded, while in the HGA-S group, they were unaffected. The findings indicate that both modes of mandibular jumping resulted in skeletal and dental effects. The length of active treatment seemed to be decisive in maintaining the treatment effects; stepwise advancement had less dental effects.en_HK
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.rightsEuropean Journal of Orthodontics. Copyright © Oxford University Press.en_HK
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten_HK
dc.subject.meshChilden_HK
dc.subject.meshExtraoral Traction Appliancesen_HK
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshHead - radiographyen_HK
dc.subject.meshHumansen_HK
dc.subject.meshMaleen_HK
dc.subject.meshMalocclusion, Angle Class II - radiography - therapyen_HK
dc.subject.meshMandibular Advancement - instrumentation - methodsen_HK
dc.subject.meshProspective Studiesen_HK
dc.subject.meshTime Factorsen_HK
dc.subject.meshTreatment Outcomeen_HK
dc.titleStepwise advancement versus maximum jumping with headgear activatoren_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0141-5387&volume=29&spage=283&epage=293&date=2007&atitle=Stepwise+advancement+versus+maximum+jumping+with+headgear+activatoren_HK
dc.identifier.emailHägg, U: euohagg@hkusua.hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailRabie, ABM: rabie@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHägg, U=rp00020en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityRabie, ABM=rp00029en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ejo/cjm018en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid17556729-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-34548442946en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros128813en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-34548442946&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume29en_HK
dc.identifier.issue3en_HK
dc.identifier.spage283en_HK
dc.identifier.epage293en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000247471200010-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWey, MC=20735994400en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBendeus, M=6506522941en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLi, P=20734804100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHägg, U=7006790279en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRabie, ABM=7007172734en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRobinson, W=55458172900en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats