Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 81, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 678-683

  Franchi, Lorenzo ^a   Alvetro, Lisa ^b   Giuntini, Veronica ^b   Masucci, Caterina ^b   Defraia, Efisio ^b   Baccetti, Tiziano ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL OF DENTISTRY   (United States)

^b University of Florence ^*  (Italy)

Author keywords

Cephalometrics; Class II malocclusion; Fixed functional appliances

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL CARE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHODONTICS; SINGLE BLIND PROCEDURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

ADOLESCENT; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE DESIGN; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES, FUNCTIONAL; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; SINGLE-BLIND METHOD; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79960186850     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: 19457103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2319/102710-629.1     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES-III survey. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 1998;13:97-106.
2. McNamara JA Jr, Brudon WL. Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Ann Arbor, Mich: Needham Press, Inc; 2001:73.
3. Tulloch JF, Proffit WR, Phillips C. Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinical trial of early Class II treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;125:657-667. (Pubitemid 38737185)
4. Stromeyer EL, Caruso JM, DeVincenzo JP. A cephalometric study of the Class II correction effects of the Eureka Spring. Angle Orthod. 2002;72:203-210.
5. Küçükkeleş N, Ilhan I, Orgun IA. Treatment efficiency in skeletal Class II patients treated with the Jasper Jumper. Angle Orthod. 2007;77:449-456.
6. Jena AK, Duggal R. Treatment effects of twin-block and mandibular protraction appliance-IV in the correction of class II malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2010;80:485-491.
7. Vogt W. The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. J Clin Orthod. 2006;40:368-377.
8. Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II nonextraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78:332-338.
9. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr. The cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of optimal treatment timing in dentofacial orthopedics. Semin Orthod. 2005;11:119-129. (Pubitemid 41245351)
10. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod. 1953;39:729-755.
11. Jacobson A. The "Wits" appraisal of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod. 1975;67:125-138.
12. Ricketts RM. Perspectives in the clinical application of cephalometrics. The first fifty years. Angle Orthod. 1981;51: 115-150.
13. McNamara JA Jr. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod. 1984;86:449-469.
14. Arnett GW, Jelic JS, Kim J, Cummings DR, Beress A, Worley CM Jr, Chung B, Bergman R. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis: diagnosis and treatment planning of dentofacial deformity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;116:239-253.
15. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Kim LH. Effect of timing on the outcomes of 1-phase nonextraction therapy of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;136: 501-509.
16. Dahlberg G. Statistical Methods for Medical and Biological Students. London, UK: G Allen & Unwin Ltd; 1940.
17. Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:155-159.
18. Franchi L, Baccetti T. Prediction of individual mandibular changes induced by functional jaw orthopedics followed by fixed appliances in Class II patients. Angle Orthod. 2006;76: 950-954. (Pubitemid 44681144)
19. Malmgren O, Ömblus J, Hägg U, Pancherz H. Treatment with an appliance system in relation to treatment intensity and growth periods. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 91:143-151.
20. Hägg U, Pancherz H. Dentofacial orthopaedics in relation to chronological age, growth period and skeletal development: an analysis of 72 male patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with the Herbst appliance. Eur J Orthod. 1988;10:169-176.
21. Petrovic A, Stutzmann J, Lavergne J. Mechanism of craniofacial growth and modus operandi of functional appliances: a cell-level and cybernetic approach to orthodontic decision making. In: Carlson DS, ed. Craniofacial Growth Theory and Orthodontic Treatment. Craniofacial Growth Series, Vol 23. Ann Arbor, Mich: Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Michigan; 1990:13-74.
22. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Stahl F. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135:698.e1-698.e10.
23. Phan KL, Bendeus M, Hägg U, Hansen K, Rabie AB. Comparison of the headgear activator and Herbst appliance- effects and post-treatment changes. Eur J Orthod. 2006;28:594-604. (Pubitemid 44906092)
24. Baccetti T, Stahl F, McNamara JA Jr. Dentofacial growth changes in subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion from late puberty through young adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009;135:148-154.
25. von Bremen J, Pancherz H. Efficiency of early and late Class II division 1 treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121:31-37. (Pubitemid 40418266)