Distalization by Miniscrew (AU)

April 30, 2015 updated by: Riyadh Abdullah Iskander, Ain Shams University

Miniscrew-supported Versus Standard Frog Molar Distalizing Appliances (Clinical Study)

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of miniscrew-supported and standard frog molar distalizing appliances.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

A prospective randomized clinical trial study was carried out on twenty healthy Egyptian subjects, each required molar distalization as part of their comprehensive orthodontic treatment. The subjects were selected and treated at the outpatient clinic of the Orthodontic Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Ain-Shams University.

The inclusion criteria in this subject selection in this study was as follows;

  1. All the subjects had an age range from 11 to 16 years with a mean of ±13.5 years.
  2. All the subjects had skeletal Class 1 or mild skeletal Class 2 due to maxillary excess.
  3. All the subjects had bilateral Class II molar relationship.
  4. All subjects were free from any dental anomalies.
  5. All subjects had good oral hygiene. The exclusion criteria in this study was as follows; 1- Missing permanent teeth with exception of 3rd molar. 2- Previous orthodontic treatment. 3- Systemic disease that may influence orthodontic treatment and drug intake. 4- Periodontal disease. 5- Functional mandibular deviations and facial asymmetry. 6- History of parafunctional habits.

The subjects were equally and randomly divided into two groups; group A and group B which included ten subjects per group. These groups were classified according to the type of distalizer utilized:

  • Group A: included ten subjects utilizing the conventional frog molar distalizing appliance (CF).
  • Group B: included ten subjects utilizing the Miniscrews-supported frog molar distalizing appliance (MSF)

The pretreatment and post-distalization Database Records All subjects had the following records; a clinical diagnostic sheet, orthodontic study cast (according to ABO index), extraoral and intraoral photographs, and CBCT.

These records were obtained at T1 before distalization and at T2 after distalization.

The study protocol was approved by the local ethics committee, faculty of dentistry, Ain-Shams University. Before commencing with treatment, all the subjects and their guardians received a full explanation of the treatment protocol. After which they were asked to sign a detailed written consent.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

20

Phase

  • Phase 1

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

11 years to 16 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. All the subjects had an age range from 11 to 16 years with a mean of ±13.5 years.
  2. All the subjects had skeletal Class 1 or mild skeletal Class 2 due to maxillary excess.
  3. All the subjects had bilateral Class II molar relationship.
  4. All subjects were free from any dental anomalies.
  5. All subjects had good oral hygiene.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Missing permanent teeth with exception of 3rd molar.
  2. Previous orthodontic treatment.
  3. Systemic disease that may influence orthodontic treatment and drug intake.
  4. Periodontal disease.
  5. Functional mandibular deviations and facial asymmetry.
  6. History of parafunctional habits.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: MS. Frog
miniscrew-supported frog molar distalizing appliance
miniscrew 10mm length and 1.7mm diameter FORESTADENT company
Other Names:
  • Skeletal Frog
Experimental: Stand. Frog
Standard Frog appliance
Nance buttons attached to first premolars band
Other Names:
  • Conventional Frog

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
mesial migration of anterior teeth measured in millimeter and angles by using cone beam computerized tomography
Time Frame: 6months
pretreatment and postdistalization records as cone beam computerized tomography and cast analysis
6months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

July 1, 2012

Primary Completion (Actual)

December 1, 2014

Study Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2015

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 19, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 27, 2015

First Posted (Estimate)

April 28, 2015

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

May 4, 2015

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 30, 2015

Last Verified

April 1, 2015

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 999

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Distalization by Miniscrews

Clinical Trials on miniscrew-supported Frog molar distalizing appliance

Subscribe