Literature DB >> 8005202

Class II: a comparison of activator and activator headgear combination appliances.

Y Oztürk1, N Tankuter.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate skeletal and dental effects of activator and activator high-pull headgear combination appliances on growing patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion. The material consisted of pre- and post-treatment cephalograms of 17 boys and 20 girls. Seventeen patients (eight male and nine female) were treated with an activator, the remaining 20 (9 male and 11 female) were treated with an activator high-pull headgear combination (AHGC) appliance. Changes due to treatment were compared with a group of 19 (nine male and ten female) untreated children. ANB angle was significantly reduced and mandibular growth development was favourable in both treatment groups. The AHGC appliance was more effective in the reduction of the maxillary prognathism. An increase of the anterior facial height and clockwise rotation of the occlusal plane was observed in the patients treated with activator appliance. The cant of the mandibular plane remained stable during both treatment periods. On the other hand, the forward displacement of the upper first molars was reduced significantly and the axial inclination of the lower incisors was controlled much better with the AHGC appliance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8005202     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/16.2.149

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  5 in total

1.  [A retrospective evaluation of the treatment of skeletal Class-II with removable appliances].

Authors:  H Fischbach; B Kahl-Nieke
Journal:  Fortschr Kieferorthop       Date:  1995-05

2.  The Goettingen "Pro-Stab" removable plate system. A retrospective cephalometric study of the effects of a new Class II treatment appliance.

Authors:  A Jähnig; R Krysewski
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  Does Appliance Design Affect Treatment Outcomes of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion? A Two-Center Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Burçin Akan; Türkan Sezen Erhamza
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Res       Date:  2021-06-30

Review 4.  Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents.

Authors:  Klaus Bsl Batista; Badri Thiruvenkatachari; Jayne E Harrison; Kevin D O'Brien
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-03-13

5.  Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion.

Authors:  Stjepan Spalj; Kate Mroz Tranesen; Kari Birkeland; Visnja Katic; Andrej Pavlic; Vaska Vandevska-Radunovic
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2017-01-22       Impact factor: 3.411

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.