Liang-Ru Chen1, Chia-Li Lai2, I-Ting Chang2, Chia-Ling Hsu2, Jeng-Fen Liu3, Chia-Tze Kao4. 1. Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Department of Stomatology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Dentistry, Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan; Orthodontic Department, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, School of Dentistry, College of Oral Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. 2. Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Department of Stomatology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. 3. Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Department of Stomatology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Dentistry, Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taipei, Taiwan. 4. Orthodontic Department, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, School of Dentistry, College of Oral Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan. Electronic address: ctk@csmu.edu.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The treatment effect of myofunctional appliance therapy has remained debated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects in class II division I pediatric patients receiving Education Fonctionnelle (EF) myofunctional appliance therapy. METHODS: Thirteen patients undergoing EF appliance treatment (9 boys and 4 girls；average 9.3years old) met the inclusion criteria and 13 untreated patients (9 boys and 4 girls；average 9.9 years old) served as controls. Initial and one-year follow-up lateral cephalometric measurement was used to assess skeletal and dentoalveolar changes. Gender ratio was analyzed using Chi-square test. Age and cephalometric measurement changes within and between the two groups were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed rank test and Benjamini - Hochberg procedure. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, gender ratio, and initial cephalometric measurement data between the two groups. One-year follow-up skeletal findings revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Regarding the dentoalveolar changes, only the values of the upper incisor angle related parameters revealed significances between the two group (with adjusted p value). CONCLUSION: In this preliminary small sample size study, the EF group demonstrated significant upper incisor angle decrease, lower incisor angle increase, and lower incisor tip to mandibular plane distance decrease in comparison to the values measured in the control group. However, only the upper incisor angle changes were statistically significant after p-value adjustment. The skeletal effect of the EF appliance could not be verified in one-year follow-up of cephalometric data.
BACKGROUND/ PURPOSE: The treatment effect of myofunctional appliance therapy has remained debated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects in class II division I pediatric patients receiving Education Fonctionnelle (EF) myofunctional appliance therapy. METHODS: Thirteen patients undergoing EF appliance treatment (9 boys and 4 girls；average 9.3years old) met the inclusion criteria and 13 untreated patients (9 boys and 4 girls；average 9.9 years old) served as controls. Initial and one-year follow-up lateral cephalometric measurement was used to assess skeletal and dentoalveolar changes. Gender ratio was analyzed using Chi-square test. Age and cephalometric measurement changes within and between the two groups were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U test and Wilcoxon signed rank test and Benjamini - Hochberg procedure. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, gender ratio, and initial cephalometric measurement data between the two groups. One-year follow-up skeletal findings revealed no significant differences between the two groups. Regarding the dentoalveolar changes, only the values of the upper incisor angle related parameters revealed significances between the two group (with adjusted p value). CONCLUSION: In this preliminary small sample size study, the EF group demonstrated significant upper incisor angle decrease, lower incisor angle increase, and lower incisor tip to mandibular plane distance decrease in comparison to the values measured in the control group. However, only the upper incisor angle changes were statistically significant after p-value adjustment. The skeletal effect of the EF appliance could not be verified in one-year follow-up of cephalometric data.