Journals / Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research) / 2009 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 1

Servikal headgear'ın transvers yön etkilerinin araştırılması

Evaluation of transverse effects of cervical headgear

Pages
2–11
Publication Date
2022-10-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Significant skeletal and dental transverse expansion was seen in the maxillary arch(p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Cervical headgear traction is a widely used treatment method for the correction of Class II division 1 malocclusion.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This prospective study evaluates the transverse effects of Ricketts type cervical headgear use in subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion due to maxillary excess.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Significant skeletal and dental transverse expansion was seen in the maxillary arch(p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: Cervical headgear traction is a widely used treatment method for the correction of Class II division 1 malocclusion. To achieve a successful skeletal correction, widening of the narrow maxilla is essential. This prospective study evaluates the transverse effects of Ricketts type cervical headgear use in subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion due to maxillary excess. Subjects and Methods: The mean age of the 22 subjects in our study was ll,l±1.0 years. Lateral cephalograms, panoramic, posteroanterior, submen-tovertex, hand-wrist radiographs and study casts of the patients were taken before treatment (TO). All of the patients were treated with Ricketts type cervical headgear. The mean amount of treatment time was 14,3±3,5 months. Post-treatment records (Tl) were obtained when Angle Class I molar relationship was achieved. Statistical analysis of the changes before and after treatment was carried out using paired t .test. Results: Significant skeletal and dental transverse expansion was seen in the maxillary arch(p

Özet

Amaç: Servikal headgear tedavisi, Sınıf II bölüm 1 malokluzyonların tedavisinde sıklıkla kullanılan bir tedavi yöntemidir. Başarılı bir iskeletsel düzeltim sağlamak için dar olan maksillanın genişletilmesi gerekmektedir. Bu prospektif çalışma, maksiller fazlalığa bağlı Sınıf II Bölüm 1 tip malokluzyona sahip bireylerde Ricketts tipi servikal headgear'in transvers etkilerini değerlendirmektedir. Bireyler ve Yöntem: Çalışmamıza dahil edilen 22 bireyin tedavi öncesi ortalama yaşları 11.1 ±1.0 yıl idi. Tedavi başlangıcında(TO) tüm hastalardan lateral kafa filmi, panaromik, posteroanterior, submentoverteks ve el-bilek filmleri alınmış, çalışma modelleri oluşturulmuştur. Tüm hastalar Ricketts tipi servikal headgear ile tedavi edilmişlerdir. Ortalama tedavi süresi 14,3±3,5 ay idi. Tedavi sonu kayıtları(Tl), Angle sınıf I molar ilişkisi elde edildiğinde alınmıştır. Tedavi başlangıcı ve sonunda elde edilen değişikliklerin tayini için eşleştirilmiş t testi kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Maksiller arkta istatistiksel olarak anlamlı iskeletsel ve dental ekspansiyongözlenmiştir(p

🔖

Cite This Article

CİĞER, S., ARİFOĞLU, B., VESKE, Ş. P. (2022). Servikal headgear'ın transvers yön etkilerinin araştırılması. Hacettepe Dişhekimliği Fakültesi Derg.(. Clinical Dentistry and Research), Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 1, 2–11. https://ajindex.com/articles/528363

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Ricketts RM, Bench RW, Gugino C.F, Hilgers JJ, Schulhof RJ. "Bioprogressive Therapy", Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, Denver, Colorado, second printing
  2. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T, Hurmerinta K, Haavikko K. Orthopedic cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in Class II correction. Angle Orthod. 2000
  3. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T, Haavikko K. Changes in dental arch dimensions by use of an orthopedic cervical headgear in Class II correction. Am J. Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1997
  4. lll:59-66. 4.Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T. Maxillary expansion in Class II correction with orthopedic cervical headgear. A posteroanterior cephalometric study. Angle Orthod. 2003
  5. 73(3):281-5. 5.Kloehn SJ. A new approach to analysis and treatment in mixed dentition. Am J Orthod.1953
  6. Kloehn SJ. Evaluation of cervical anchorage force in treatment. Angle Orthod. 1961
  7. Wieslander L. The effect of orthodontic treatment on the concurrent development of the craniofacial complex. Am J Orthod. 1963
  8. Hanes RA. Bony profile changes resulting from cervical traction compared with those resulting from intermaxillary elastics. Am J Orthod. 1959
  9. Dermaut LR, Kleutghen JR, De Clerck NJ. Experimental determination of the center of resistance of the upper molar in a macerated, dry human skull submited to horizontal headgear traction. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1986
  10. Profitt, WR."Contemporary Orthodontics",The Mosby Company, London
  11. Barton JJ. High-pull headgear versus cervical traction: a cephalometric comparison. Am J Orthod.1972
  12. Nanda R. Biomechanics in clinical orthodontics. W.B. Saunders Company. Philedelphia
  13. Aran I, Uras E, Hurmeydan H. Ortodontik tedavide ağız dışı kuvvetlerin uygulanmasında 'Servikal Headgear' lerden yararlanılması. Hacettepe Dis Hekimliği Fakültesi Dergisi.1978
  14. 222 14.Aelbers FMC, Dermaut RL. Orthopedics in orthodontics: Part I, fiction or reality a review of the letarature. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop.1996
  15. Graber MT,Vanarsdall IR.Orthodontics Current Principles and Techniques. The Mosby Company. Chapter 8
  16. 1994 16.Owen HA. Diagnostic block cephalometrics, part 2. J Clin Orthod. 1984
  17. Ricketts MR. Early Treatment. JCO/Interviews, Part 3. J Clin Orthod. 1979
  18. Poulton DR. The influence of extraoral traction. Am J Orthod. 1967
  19. Schudy FF. The rotation of mandible resulting from growth. Its im