Journals / Cumhuriyet Dental Journal / 2019 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2

COMPLIANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS IN CERVICAL HEADGEAR

Servikal Headgear Kullanımında Kooperasyon ve Etkinlik

Pages
147–155
Publication Date
2022-11-06
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)

By means of objective data for monthly appliance usage, this study showedthat in order to achieve the targeted results the cervical headgear should be used atleast 12 hours daily.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the correlation betweenheadgear wear duration and correction of skeletal and dental Class II malocclusion inpreadolescent patients.Materials and Methods: The study material consisted of pre and posttreatmentlateral cephalograms, and actual headgear wear hours calculated from data recordedmonthly by an electronic timer device, (Compliance Science System (CSS) andAffirm Smart Headgear Modules, Ortho Kinetics, Vista, California, USA) of 30patients (14 female and 16 male) treated with cervical headgear for 12 months.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Themean age was 10.43 ± 1.07 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:By means of objective data for monthly appliance usage, this study showedthat in order to achieve the targeted results the cervical headgear should be used atleast 12 hours daily.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the correlation betweenheadgear wear duration and correction of skeletal and dental Class II malocclusion inpreadolescent patients.Materials and Methods: The study material consisted of pre and posttreatmentlateral cephalograms, and actual headgear wear hours calculated from data recordedmonthly by an electronic timer device, (Compliance Science System (CSS) andAffirm Smart Headgear Modules, Ortho Kinetics, Vista, California, USA) of 30patients (14 female and 16 male) treated with cervical headgear for 12 months. Themean age was 10.43 ± 1.07 years. Initial and progress cephalograms were analyzedaccording to skeletal and dental landmarks to evaluate treatment effect of theappliance. The actual number of hours of appliance wear was calculated by data fromtimer modules collected every monthly visit. Statistical analysis was performed byusing SPSS 24.0.Results: While a sagittal growth was still observed in the group using the headgearfor less than 12 hours, restriction of sagittal growth of maxilla was achieved in thegroup using the cervical headgear over 12 hours daily.Conclusions: The cervical headgear is still used in orthodontics to restrict the forwardgrowth of the maxilla in Class II division 1 patients with a normal or low angleprofile. By means of objective data for monthly appliance usage, this study showedthat in order to achieve the targeted results the cervical headgear should be used atleast 12 hours daily.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, genç bireylerde, servikal headgear kullanım süresi ile iskeletsel ve dental Sınıf II malokluzyonun tedavi sonucu arasındaki ilişkinin değerlendirilmesidir. Gereçler ve Yöntemler: Çalışma materyali, servikal headgear ile tedavi olan, ortalama yaş aralığı 10,43 ± 1,07 olan 30 hastanın (14 kız ve 16 erkek) tedavi öncesi ve tedavi sonrası lateral sefalometrik radyografileri ve dijital bir modül, (Compliance Science System (CSS) and Affirm Smart Headgear Modules, Ortho Kinetics, Vista, California, USA) ile kaydedilen aylık aparey kullanım sürelerini gösteren verilerden oluşmuştur. Apareyin tedavi üzerindeki etkinliği hastaların tedavi öncesi ve sonrası lateral sefalamoterik radyografilerinin üzerinde belirlenen iskeletsel ve dental noktalar kullanılarak yapılan ölçümler ile belirlenmiştir. Aparey kullanım süreleri her ay kontrol randevularında modüllerin okutulması ile elde edilmiştir. İstatistiksel analizler SPSS 24.0 programı kullanılarak yapılmıştır. Bulgular: Apareyi 12 saatten fazla kullanan grupta maksillanın sagittal yön büyümesinin frenlendiği gözlenirken, apareyi 12 saatten daha az kullanan hastalarda sagittal yönde maksiller büyümenin olduğu gözlenmiştir. Sonuçlar: Servikal headgear, Sınıf II bölüm 1 malokluzyon tedavisinde maksiller büyümeyi frenlemek amacı ile kullanılan bir apareydir. Bu çalışmada, servikal headgear kullanımında istenilen hedefe erişilmesi için apareyin günde en az 12 saat kullanılması gerektiği objektif veriler kullanılarak ortaya konulmuştur

🔖

Cite This Article

Trakyalı, G., Dayıoğlu, N. (2022). COMPLIANCE AND EFFECTIVENESS IN CERVICAL HEADGEAR. Cumhuriyet Dental Journal, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 2, 147–155. https://ajindex.com/articles/649407

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. 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 Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:59-66
  2. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T, Hurmerinta K, Haavikko K. Orthopedic cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in Class II correction. Angle Orthod 2000;70:317-325
  3. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T. Maxillary expansion in Class II correction with orthopedic cervical headgear: a posteroanterior cephalometric study. Angle Orthod 2003;73:281-285
  4. Wieslander L. Early or late cervical traction therapy of Class II malocclusion in the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod 1975;67:432-439
  5. Allan T, Hodgson E. The use of personality measurements as a determinant of patient cooperation in an orthodontic practice. Am J Orthod 1968;54:433- 440
  6. Güray E, Orhan M. Selçuk type headgear-timer (STHT). Am J Orthod and Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:87-92
  7. Doruk C, Ağar U, Babacan H. The role of the headgear timer in extra oral cooperation. Eur J Orthod 2004;26:289-291
  8. Brandão M, Pinho HS, Urias D. Clinical and quantitative assessment of headgear compliance: a pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:239-244
  9. Tortop T, Yüksel S. Treatment and Posttreatment Changes with Combined Headgear Therapy. Angle Orthod 2007;77:857-863
  10. Mossaz CF, Byloff FK, Kiliaridis S. Cervical headgear vs pendulum appliance for the treatment of moderate skeletal Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:616-623
  11. Zhang JM, Chen HY, Zhang L. Pancherz's analysis in evaluating the treatment effects of headgearactivator on skeletal Class II divison 1 malocclusion. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2007;25:557-560
  12. Godt A, Berneburg M, Kalwitzki M, Göz G. Cephalometric analysis of molar and anterior tooth movement during cervical headgear treatment in relation to growth patterns. J Orofac Orthop 2008;69:189-200
  13. Graber TM, Swain BF. Current orthodontic concepts and techniques, 2nd ed; St. Louis: CV Mosby, 1975;365-452. 14.Brandt S, Root TL. Interview: Dr. Terrel L. Root on headgear. J Clin Orthod 1975;9:20-41. 15.Ramsay DS, Soma M, Sarason IG. Enhancing patient adherence: the role of technology and its application to orthodontics. In: McNamara JA Jr, Trotman CA, Ferrara A, editors. Creating the compliance patient. Monograph 33. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan; 1996:141-165
  14. Northcutt ME.