Literature DB >> 1962605

Age effects on orthodontic treatment: adolescents contrasted with adults.

G S Dyer1, E F Harris, J L Vaden.   

Abstract

Skeletodental treatment changes in 30 adolescent girls and 26 women who had Class II, Division 1 malocclusions were contrasted cephalometrically, primarily with the McNamara analysis. The data show that adult treatment does not obligate the practitioner to longer treatment. In this study, both age groups were treated in 2.5 years on the average. Apical base corrections were achieved with equal facility in both groups by the posterior remodeling of point A, and this (in conjunction with unrestrained mandibular growth) is the major source of correction in the adolescents. In adults, in whom growth is trivial, an appreciable source of sagittal correction is the steepening of the occlusal plane. Several sequelae of Class II elastic force occurred as by-products of molar correction in the adults: increased mandibular molar eruption, increased maxillary molar intrusion, increased maxillary incisor eruption, increased mandibular incisor intrusion, and steepening of the occlusal plane.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1962605     DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(91)70092-B

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  10 in total

1.  Interdisciplinary concepts in treating adult patients.

Authors:  N Akin-Nergiz; I Nergiz; P Schmage
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  Is there a relationship between mandibular cortical bone thickness and orthodontic treatment time?

Authors:  Melissa Landin-Ramos; Sumit Yadav; Vaibhav Gandhi; Madhur Upadhyay; Aditya Tadinada
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 2.079

3.  Pain experience in adults undergoing treatment: A longitudinal evaluation.

Authors:  Ama Johal; Asma B Ashari; Nasser Alamiri; Padhraig S Fleming; Usman Qureshi; Shirley Cox; Nikolaos Pandis
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Duration of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances in adolescents and adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Allen Abbing; Vasiliki Koretsi; Theodore Eliades; Spyridon N Papageorgiou
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2020-10-05       Impact factor: 2.750

Review 5.  Age effect on orthodontic tooth movement rate and the composition of gingival crevicular fluid : A literature review.

Authors:  Anne Schubert; Fabian Jäger; Jaap C Maltha; Theodosia N Bartzela
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 1.938

6.  Frequency evaluation of different extraction protocols in orthodontic treatment during 35 years.

Authors:  Guilherme Janson; Fábio Rogério Torres Maria; Roberto Bombonatti
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 2.750

7.  Factors influencing orthodontic treatment time for non-surgical Class III malocclusion.

Authors:  Lívia Monteiro Bichara; Mônica Lídia Castro de Aragón; Gustavo Antônio Martins Brandão; David Normando
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.698

8.  Comparison of orthodontic tooth movement between adolescents and adults based on implant superimposition.

Authors:  Meng-Jiao Ruan; Gui Chen; Tian-Min Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Dentoalveolar surgery techniques combined with orthodontic treatment: A literature review.

Authors:  F Deniz Uzuner; Nilufer Darendeliler
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2013-04

10.  Treatment Effects of the Herbst Appliance in Class II Malocclusion Patients after the Growth Peak.

Authors:  Rodrigo Hermont Cançado; Guilherme Janson; Bryan Tompson; José Carlos de Castro Alvares; Fabrício Pinelli Valarelli; Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas
Journal:  Eur J Dent       Date:  2020-08-31
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.