Effectiveness of the lower protraction sliding jig in the correction of the class II division 2 malocclusion
PURPOSE: Evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the lower protraction sliding jig to correct canine class II division 2 malocclusion, particularly in patients whose lower incisives are lingually inclined and do not have a tendency to grow vertically. METHODS: This randomized controlled clinical tria...
| Autor Principal: | Burbano Delgado, Adriana Elizabeth; Pontificia Universidad Javeriana |
|---|---|
| Otros Autores: | Guerrero Vera, Yenny Esperanza; Pontificia universidad Javeriana, De Los Reyes Victoria, Alfonso María; Pontificia Universidad Javeriana |
| Formato: | info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| Idioma: | spa |
| Publicado: |
Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana
2009
|
| Acceso en línea: |
http://revistas.javeriana.edu.co/index.php/revUnivOdontologica/article/view/541 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: |
PURPOSE: Evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the lower protraction sliding jig to correct canine class II division 2 malocclusion, particularly in patients whose lower incisives are lingually inclined and do not have a tendency to grow vertically. METHODS: This randomized controlled clinical trial had a sample of 20 patients with disgnosis of class II division 2 malocclusion. The experimental group consisted of the dental segments where the lower protraction sliding jig appliance was applied and the control group consisted of those segments where treatment with class II elastics was carried out, both in the same patient. The sliding jig was compared to the class II elastics regarding amount of movement measured in milimeters and time measured in weeks. Measures were taken before and after the treatment. RESULTS: Patients treated with sliding jig showed a higher correction (3.78 mm) than those who underwent treatment with the class II elastics (3.51 mm). The differences were significant because the dental movements with the sliding jig were faster than those with the class II elastics. The amount of movement with the sliding jig was 0.2453 mm/week compared to 0.1916 mm/week with the elastics, which means that the appliance was 28% faster in producing the same amount of movement. The use of this appliance may shorten length of treatment. |
|---|