We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Modified tandem traction bow appliance compared with facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.
Angle Orthodontist 2014 July
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of the modified tandem traction bow appliance (MTTBA) and the facemask in treating patients with Class III malocclusion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The material consisted of the pre-post treatment\pre-post observation lateral cephalograms of 65 subjects with skeletal and dental Class III malocclusion. In the first group 21 patients (mean age: 10 years, 6 months) were treated with a Delaire-type facemask (FM). In the second group 22 patients treated (mean age: 10 years) with MTTBA. The remaining 22 children (mean age: 9 years, 7 months) were observed without treatment for 11 months.
RESULTS: Increase in SNA, N-FH ⊥ A, and ANB angles were significantly greater in the treatment groups compared to the control group. However, ANB angle showed a significantly greater increase in the FM group (2.8 ± 0.30°) than in the MTTBA group (2.0 ± 0.18°). The overjet and molar relation increased significantly in both treatment groups, but in the FM group (5.2 ± 0.40 mm) increase in overjet was significantly greater than in the MTTBA group (4.0 ± 0.27 mm). Mesial movement of upper molar and incisor were found to be greater in the FM group compared to the modified TTBA group.
CONCLUSIONS: Both appliances were found to be effective in the treatment of Class III malocclusion. Their skeletal and dental effects showed differences due to their design.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The material consisted of the pre-post treatment\pre-post observation lateral cephalograms of 65 subjects with skeletal and dental Class III malocclusion. In the first group 21 patients (mean age: 10 years, 6 months) were treated with a Delaire-type facemask (FM). In the second group 22 patients treated (mean age: 10 years) with MTTBA. The remaining 22 children (mean age: 9 years, 7 months) were observed without treatment for 11 months.
RESULTS: Increase in SNA, N-FH ⊥ A, and ANB angles were significantly greater in the treatment groups compared to the control group. However, ANB angle showed a significantly greater increase in the FM group (2.8 ± 0.30°) than in the MTTBA group (2.0 ± 0.18°). The overjet and molar relation increased significantly in both treatment groups, but in the FM group (5.2 ± 0.40 mm) increase in overjet was significantly greater than in the MTTBA group (4.0 ± 0.27 mm). Mesial movement of upper molar and incisor were found to be greater in the FM group compared to the modified TTBA group.
CONCLUSIONS: Both appliances were found to be effective in the treatment of Class III malocclusion. Their skeletal and dental effects showed differences due to their design.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app