Activator versus cervical headgear: Superimpositional cephalometric comparison

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 123, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 296-305

  Haralabakis, N B ^a   Halazonetis, D J ^a   Sifakakis, I B ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CERVICAL HEADGEAR; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; MANDIBLE; MOLAR TOOTH; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DENTAL CARE; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; ORTHODONTICS; PHYSIOLOGY;

ACTIVATOR APPLIANCES; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; EXTRAORAL TRACTION APPLIANCES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; MOLAR; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 0037364365     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1067/mod.2003.20     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Tulloch JF, Phillips C, Koch G, Proffit WR. The effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in Class II malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:391-400.
2. Tulloch JF, Phillips C, Proffit WR. Benefit of early Class II treatment: progress report of a two-phase randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:62-72.
3. Keeling SD, Wheeler TT, King GJ, Garvan CW, Cohen DA, Cabassa S, et al. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:40-50.
4. Moyers RE, Bookstein FL. The inappropriateness of conventional cephalometrics. Am J Orthod 1979;75:599-617.
5. Johnston LE. A comparative analysis of Class II treatments. In: Vig PS, Ribbens KA, editors. Science and clinical judgment in orthodontics, Monograph No. 19, Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan; 1985. p.103-48.
6. Mannchen R. A critical evaluation of the pitchfork analysis. Eur J Orthod 2001;23:1-14.
7. Halazonetis DJ. Cephalometric analysis of changes in occlusal relationship. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:449-61.
8. Halazonetis DJ. Computer-assisted cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994;105:517-21.
9. Miethke RR. Possibilities and limitations of various cephalometric variables and analyses. In: Athanasiou AE, editor. Orthodontic cephalometry. London: Mosby-Wolfe; 1995.
10. Baumrind S, Korn EL, Isaacson RJ, West EE, Molthen R. Quantitative analysis of the orthodontic and orthopedic effects of maxillary traction. Am J Orthod 1983;84:384-98.
11. Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible - a synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983;5:1-45.
12. Houston WJB. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983;83:382-9.
13. Ghafari J, Shofer FS, Jacobsson-Hunt U, Markowitz DL, Laster LL. Headgear versus function regulator in the early treatment of Class II, Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:51-61.
14. Pancherz H. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to Class II correction in activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1984;85:125-34.
15. Halazonetis D, Haralabakis N. Cephalometric assessment of activator treatment. Pedodontia 1995;9:25-32.
16. Ben-Bassat Y, Baumrind S, Korn EL. Mandibular molar displacement secondary to the use of forces to retract maxilla. Am J Orthod 1986;89:1-12.
17. Hubbard GW, Nanda RS, Currier GF. A cephalometric evaluation of nonextraction cervical headgear treatment in Class II malocclusions. Angle Orthod 1994;64:359-70.
18. Jakobsson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on Class II, Division 1 malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1967;53:446-57.
19. Baumrind S, Korn EL. Patterns of change in mandibular and facial shape associated with the use of forces to retract maxilla. Am J Orthod 1981;80:31-47.
20. Baumrind S, Molthen R, West EE, Miller DM.. Mandibular plane changes during maxillary retraction. Am J Orthod 1978; 74:32-40.
21. Baumrind S, Molthen R, West EE, Miller DM. Mandibular plane changes during maxillary retraction, part 2. Am J Orthod 1978;74:603-20.
22. Baumrind S, Molthen R, West EE, Miller DM. Mandibular plane changes during maxillary retraction, part 2 addenda. Am J Orthod 1979;75:86-9.
23. Wieslander L, Buck DI. Physiologic recovery after cervical traction therapy. Am J Orthod 1974;66:294-301.
24. Barton JJ. High-pull headgear versus cervical traction: a cephalometric comparison. Am J Orthod 1972;62:517-29.
25. Merifield LL, Cross J. Directional forces. Am J Orthod 1970;57: 435-64.
26. Greenspan RA. Reference charts for controlled extraoral force application to maxillary molars. Am J Orthod 1970;58:486-91.
27. Meach A. A cephalometric comparison of bony profile changes in Class II, Division 1 patients treated with extraoral force and functional jaw orthopedics. Am J Orthod 1966;52:353-70.
28. Stöckli PW, Teuscher UM. Combined activator headgear orthopedics. In Graber MT, Vanarsdall RL Jr, editors. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 2nd ed. St Louis: C. V. Mosby; 1994.
29. Björk A. The principles of the Andresen method of orthodontic treatment: a discussion based on cephalometric x-ray analysis of treated cases. Am J Orthod 1951;37:437-58.
30. Harvold EP, Vargervik K. Morphogenetic response to activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1971;60:320-37.
31. Gianelly AA, Brosnan P, Martgnoni M, Bernstein L. Mandibular growth, condyle position and Fränkel appliance therapy. Angle Orthod 1983;53:131-42.