IADR Abstract Archives
Effects of Three Different Treatment Modalities on Dental Arch Dimensions in Skeletal Class II Malocclusion – A Cross-sectional Study
Objectives: Patients with class II skeletal malocclusion usually present with transverse issues. This study aimed to compare the effects of Clark’s twin block appliance therapy (CTB), upper first premolars extraction (U4) and non-extraction (NE) treatment modalities on dentoalveolar width and buccolingual inclinations in the transverse dimension.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of 45 skeletal class II subjects, aged 10-35 years, ideally treated with CTB, U4 and NE. Transverse arch dimensions were manually measured on the pre- and post-treatment dental casts using a digital vernier caliper and a universal bevel protractor. A paired t-test was used to compare the pre- and post-treatment values of dental arch width changes. The one-way ANOVA was applied to compare dental arch width changes among the treatment groups which were further evaluated by post-hoc Tukey for comparing the pre- and post-treatment dental arch changes between groups.
Results: Statistically significant differences for upper arch width dimensions were found between CTB and U4 groups (p < 0.001). Highly statistically significant differences were found for lower arch width dimensions between NE and U4 groups (p < 0.001) with the U4 group showing the greatest increase. There was a statistically significant difference in the buccolingual inclinations among all three groups.
Conclusions: Upper arch transverse dimensions were observed to be increased in patients treated with CTB, while in the upper first premolars extraction group lower arch width showed a significant increase. The non-extraction group showed the least changes in the pre- and post-treatment transverse dimensions.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on a sample of 45 skeletal class II subjects, aged 10-35 years, ideally treated with CTB, U4 and NE. Transverse arch dimensions were manually measured on the pre- and post-treatment dental casts using a digital vernier caliper and a universal bevel protractor. A paired t-test was used to compare the pre- and post-treatment values of dental arch width changes. The one-way ANOVA was applied to compare dental arch width changes among the treatment groups which were further evaluated by post-hoc Tukey for comparing the pre- and post-treatment dental arch changes between groups.
Results: Statistically significant differences for upper arch width dimensions were found between CTB and U4 groups (p < 0.001). Highly statistically significant differences were found for lower arch width dimensions between NE and U4 groups (p < 0.001) with the U4 group showing the greatest increase. There was a statistically significant difference in the buccolingual inclinations among all three groups.
Conclusions: Upper arch transverse dimensions were observed to be increased in patients treated with CTB, while in the upper first premolars extraction group lower arch width showed a significant increase. The non-extraction group showed the least changes in the pre- and post-treatment transverse dimensions.