Effect of T4K Versus Twin Block in Developing Class II Division I Malocculsion

April 6, 2020 updated by: Nourhan M.Aly

The Effect of T4K Versus Twin Block in Developing Class II Division I Malocculsion (Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial)

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect of myofunctional trainer T4K versus twin block functional appliance on the dentoalveolar changes in children with class II division I malocclusion

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Detailed Description

This study was a parallel arm randomized comparative clinical trial including 20 healthy children age ranged from 9-12 years showing Angle's class II division I malocclusion due to mandibular retrusion. Preoperative photographs, radiographs and study casts were taken, children were randomly assigned into two groups according to the appliance used; Group 1: T4k, and Group II: twin block. Follow up was done every 4 weeks for 9 months. Postoperative cephalometric X ray, study casts and photographs were retaken for measurements and comparison.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

20

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Alexandria, Egypt, 21512
        • Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University

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

9 years to 12 years (Child)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Angle's class II division I malocclusion due to mandibular retrusion depending on clinical judgement and confirmed with the lateral cephalometric X-ray.
  • Parental written consent was secured.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with mandibular shifts.
  • Patients with severe crowding.
  • Patients with anterior open bite.
  • Patients with posterior crossbite.
  • Patients with any peri-oral habits.
  • Patients who had received any previous orthodontic or orthopaedic treatments.

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: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: T4k
The pre-fabricated, hard, polyurethane, pink T4K™ (Myo functional research Co., Australia) was used in the study. It consisted of: facial bows, lingual bows / tongue guard, lingual tag / tongue tag, dental channels with a pre-determined bite position and a lip bumper. In the first week, the patients were instructed to gradually increase the wearing time of the appliance during the daytime. By the second week, the patients were instructed to wear the appliance achieving at least 8 hours during sleeping. The Trainer usually needs no adjustments. The patients were asked to place it themselves inside their mouths. The distal ends of the appliance were trimmed 2-3 mm with an acrylic bur on a straight hand piece if they were too long or the patient could not keep his lips together. By the end of the first 4 weeks, the patients were wearing the appliances minimum of 1 hour during the day plus the overnight wear following the manufacturer's instructions.
Active Comparator: Twin block
The twin block was used, and instructions were given to wear the appliance nearly full-time. Selective sequential inter-occlusal trimming was done monthly after the 2nd month in the occlusal surface of the maxillary bite blocks to clear over the mandibular molars allowing their eruption in a more favourable mesial direction and to increase the vertical dimension. Trimming was done in the fitting surface over the maxillary and mandibular premolars whenever needed to allow their full eruption and to level the occlusal plane

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Dento-alveolar changes
Time Frame: baseline
This was assessed using lateral cephalometric xrays. Inclination of of maxillary incisor was assessed by measuring the angle to Frankfurt horizontal plane
baseline
Dento-alveolar changes
Time Frame: 9 months
This was assessed using lateral cephalometric xrays. Inclination of of maxillary incisor was assessed by measuring the angle to Frankfurt horizontal plane
9 months
Overjet
Time Frame: baseline
the extent of horizontal (anterior-posterior) overlap of the maxillary central incisors over the mandibular central incisors was measured on study casts.
baseline
Overjet
Time Frame: 9 months
the extent of horizontal (anterior-posterior) overlap of the maxillary central incisors over the mandibular central incisors was measured on study casts.
9 months
Overbite
Time Frame: baseline
the extent of vertical (superior-inferior) overlap of the maxillary central incisors over the mandibular central incisors, measured relative to the incisal ridges. This was assessed on study casts
baseline
Overbite
Time Frame: 9 months
the extent of vertical (superior-inferior) overlap of the maxillary central incisors over the mandibular central incisors, measured relative to the incisal ridges. This was assessed on study casts
9 months

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Study Chair: Laila M El Habashy, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
  • Principal Investigator: Yasmine El Hamouly, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Pharos University in Alexandria.
  • Study Chair: Hanan A Ismaiel, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt
  • Study Chair: Azza A ElHousseiny, PhD, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt

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 (Actual)

January 23, 2008

Primary Completion (Actual)

November 30, 2010

Study Completion (Actual)

December 18, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 3, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 3, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

April 7, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

April 8, 2020

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 6, 2020

Last Verified

April 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • T4k versus Twin block

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Orthodontic Appliances

Clinical Trials on T4k Appliance

3
Subscribe