Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment
- PMID: 17920501
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.046
Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment
Erratum in
- Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Dec;132(6):727
Abstract
Introduction: Previous studies reported small but significant skeletal changes as a result of early treatment of Class II malocclusion with headgear and functional appliances. In this study, we report on the skeletal changes for 1-phase and 2-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion.
Methods: This was a prospective randomized clinical trial conducted sy the Department of Orthodontics at the University of Florida between 1990 and 2000. A total of 261 subjects demonstrating at least a one half-cusp Class II molar relationship and meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study and had at least 1 follow-up visit. During phase 1, 86 subjects were treated with a bionator, 95 were treated with a headgear/biteplane, and 80 served as the observation group. For phase 2, all subjects were then treated with full orthodontics appliances. Skeletal changes were monitored with cephalograms taken at baseline, at the end of early Class II treatment or observation baseline, at the beginning of fixed appliances, and at end of orthodontic treatment.
Results: Overall skeletal changes at the end of phase 1 treatment were as follows: (1) SNA angle increased in the bionator (0.51) and the observation groups (0.67), whereas it decreased (-0.50) in the headgear/biteplane group; (2) SNB angle increased in the bionator (1.36) and the observation groups (0.84), whereas it remained unchanged (0.19) in the headgear/biteplane group; (3) ANB angle decreased in the bionator (-0.85) and the headgear/biteplane groups (-0.72), and was unchanged in the observation group; and (4) the mandibular plane angle increased (1.30) only in the headgear/biteplane group. By the end of full orthodontic treatment, the skeletal differences in all measurements for all 3 groups were within 1 degrees . Linear regression models showed that, during phase 1, baseline value and treatment group were significant. However, when the entire treatment period was considered, treatment group had no effect.
Conclusions: There is temporary skeletal change as a result of phase I treatment with both appliances but no detectible skeletal difference between 1-phase and 2-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion by the end of full orthodontic treatment.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of arch dimension changes in 1-phase vs 2-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jul;136(1):65-74. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.06.020. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009. PMID: 19577150 Clinical Trial.
-
Effect of early treatment on stability of occlusion in patients with Class II malocclusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Feb;133(2):235-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.02.038. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008. PMID: 18249290 Clinical Trial.
-
Centrographic analysis of 1-phase versus 2-phase treatment for Class II malocclusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005 Aug;128(2):195-200. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.04.028. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005. PMID: 16102404 Clinical Trial.
-
National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research efficacy trials of bionator class II treatment: a review.Angle Orthod. 2002 Dec;72(6):571-5. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0571:NIODAC>2.0.CO;2. Angle Orthod. 2002. PMID: 12518950 Review.
-
Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class II treatment with bionators and headgear.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Jan;113(1):40-50. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70275-6. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998. PMID: 9457018 Review.
Cited by
-
Two-phase treatment of class II malocclusion in young growing patient.Contemp Clin Dent. 2011 Oct;2(4):376-80. doi: 10.4103/0976-237X.91808. Contemp Clin Dent. 2011. PMID: 22346172 Free PMC article.
-
Effects of Two-Phase Treatment with Functional Appliances Followed by Extraction versus One-Phase Treatment with Extraction in Class II Growing Patients: A Case-Control Study.J Clin Med. 2022 Dec 15;11(24):7428. doi: 10.3390/jcm11247428. J Clin Med. 2022. PMID: 36556044 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of two different mandibular advancement methods: conventional technique vs aesthetic approach.Eur Oral Res. 2022 May 5;56(2):96-101. doi: 10.26650/eor.2022939871. Eur Oral Res. 2022. PMID: 36003847 Free PMC article.
-
Long-term skeletodental changes with early and late treatment using modified C-palatal plates in hyperdivergent Class II adolescents.Angle Orthod. 2024 May 1;94(3):303-312. doi: 10.2319/081123-556.1. Angle Orthod. 2024. PMID: 38639455 Free PMC article.
-
Optimal Treatment Timing in Orthodontics: A Scoping Review.Eur J Dent. 2024 Feb;18(1):86-96. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1768974. Epub 2023 Jun 13. Eur J Dent. 2024. PMID: 37311555 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials