2010Chinese Journal of Aesthetic MedicineRequires access

Comparative study of simple protraction and protraction combined with Class III intermaxillary traction treatment of early skeletal Class III malocclusion

Ju Zhen

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To observe the clinical effect of simple protraction compared with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction treatment of early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.Methods We Selected 26 patients with early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.13 patients wre treated with Simple protraction and the others were treated with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction.The therapeutic changes by cephalometric analysis of 2 groups before and after treatment were compared.Statistical analysis was done.Results The therapeutic period of the Simple protraction was 8.2 months,the combined group was 6.3 months,and the difference was significant (P0.05).All patients were satisfied with the treatment effect.After treatment,all patients maxillary base bone was antelocation,mandibular base bone was retreated.Maxillary anterior teeth were proclination and forward,upper lip was forward,lower lip was backward,the two groups had no significant difference (P0.5).Compared with the simple protraction group,lower incisors of the combined group wre lingual inclination and backward significantly,overjet increased significantly,and the difference was significant (P0.05).Conclusion The two methods both can treat early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion effectively,but the combind methed can shorten the course,and effect was better.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To observe the clinical effect of simple protraction compared with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction treatment of early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.Methods We Selected 26 patients with early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.13 patients wre treated with Simple protraction and the others were treated with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction.The therapeutic changes by cephalometric analysis of 2 groups before and after treatment were compared.Statistical analysis was done.Results The therapeutic period of the Simple protraction was 8.2 months,the combined group was 6.3 months,and the difference was significant (P0.05).All patients were satisfied with the treatment effect.After treatment,all patients maxillary base bone was antelocation,mandibular base bone was retreated.Maxillary anterior teeth were proclination and forward,upper lip was forward,lower lip was backward,the two groups had no significant difference (P0.5).Compared with the simple protraction group,lower incisors of the combined group wre lingual inclination and backward significantly,overjet increased significantly,and the difference was significant (P0.05).Conclusion The two methods both can treat early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion effectively,but the combind methed can shorten the course,and effect was better.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To observe the clinical effect of simple protraction compared with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction treatment of early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.Methods We Selected 26 patients with early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion.13 patients wre treated with Simple protraction and the others were treated with protraction combined with Class Ⅲ intermaxillary traction.The therapeutic changes by cephalometric analysis of 2 groups before and after treatment were compared.Statistical analysis was done.Results The therapeutic period of the Simple protraction was 8.2 months,the combined group was 6.3 months,and the difference was significant (P0.05).All patients were satisfied with the treatment effect.After treatment,all patients maxillary base bone was antelocation,mandibular base bone was retreated.Maxillary anterior teeth were proclination and forward,upper lip was forward,lower lip was backward,the two groups had no significant difference (P0.5).Compared with the simple protraction group,lower incisors of the combined group wre lingual inclination and backward significantly,overjet increased significantly,and the difference was significant (P0.05).Conclusion The two methods both can treat early skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion effectively,but the combind methed can shorten the course,and effect was better.

Key concepts: Overjet, Malocclusion, Medicine, Dentistry, Traction (geology), Orthodontics, Cephalometric analysis, Significant difference

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative study of simple protraction and protraction combined with Class III intermaxillary traction treatment of early skeletal Class III malocclusion — Research Paper | ScholarLens