Comparison of the effects of Twin Block and activator treatment on the soft tissue profile.
ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of activator and Twin Block (TB) appliances on the soft tissue profile. The study included 50 skeletal Class II patients (25 girls and 25 boys, mean age: 11.9 +/- 0.16 years) who were randomly allocated to one of two functional appliance treatment groups. The control group included 25 untreated skeletal Class II patients (13 boys and 12 girls, mean age: 10.11 +/- 0.91 years). Data were obtained from standardized lateral cephalograms taken at the beginning (T0) and end (T1) of appliance wear. The mean treatment time was 9 months for the activator group and 8 months for the TB group. The observation period of the control group was 8 months. Soft tissue profile changes were evaluated by means of 12 linear and five angular measurements. The groups were compared at T0 and T1 using analysis of variance, and treatment/observation differences (T1-T0) were evaluated with the Kruskal-Wallis test. Treatment changes in both appliance groups differed significantly (P < or = 0.001) from those in the control group, except for Ss-y, Ls-y, Li-E, and A-y measurements in the TB group and Ls-y, Li-E, nasolabial angle, and A-y measurements in the activator group. When the effects of the two appliances were compared, significant differences were observed only for SS-y (P < or = 0.05), Ss-E (P < or = 0.05), Si-E (P < or = 0.05), and nasolabial angle (P < or = 0.01). The effects of the activator and TB appliances on the soft tissue profile were similar; both significantly changed the soft tissue profile.
- SourceAvailable from: Somayeh HeidariJournal of Islamic Dental Association of Iran. 12/2012; 24(4):288-293.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dental, skeletal, and soft tissue effects during Twin-block treatment.The European Journal of Orthodontics 07/2014; · 1.39 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: Functional appliances such as Bionator have been used to treat Class II malocclusion. The purpose of this study was to compare the skeletal, dental and soft tissue effects of Bionator appliances with Multi-P (a newly developed appliance) in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Methods and Materials: 45 class II children were chosen and randomly assigned to either the Bionator or Multi-P treatment group. After excluding 13 patients from the study, 21 patients in Bionator and 11 patients in Multi-P group have participated in the study. Lateral cephalograms were analyzed at the beginning (To) and at the end of treatment (T1) to evaluate the changes in both groups. The paired t.test and Leven’s test were enrolled for statistical analysis. Results: Reduction of ANB angle was detected in both treatment groups. The Bionator group underwent insignificant greater mandibular advancement as measured by the SNB angle. (P= 0.73) The mandibular plane angle increased insignificantly in both groups. (P> 0.05) The inclination of upper incisors decreased significantly in Multi-P group. (P= 0.04) Conclusion: Both appliances are effective therapeutic means for class II treatment associated with mandibular deficiency and may lead to normalization of the dentoskeletal parameters at the end of the treatment.Galen Medical Journal. 04/2013; 2(1):1-11.