The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access originally published online on June 16, 2005
The European Journal of Orthodontics 2005 27(5):429-436; doi:10.1093/ejo/cji025
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The effects of early headgear treatment on dental arches and craniofacial morphology: an 8 year report of a randomized study
* Department of Orthodontics and Oral Development, Institute of Dentistry, University of Oulu, ** Health Centre of Haapavesi, *** Health Centre of Oulu, Finland, and **** Department of Orthodontics, Kaunas University of Medicine, Lithuania
Address for correspondence Pertti Pirttiniemi, Department of Orthodontics and Oral Development, Institute of Dentistry, University of Oulu, Box 5281, 90014 Oulu, Finland. E-mail: ppirtin{at}cc.oulu.fi
The aim of this study was to determine the long-term effects of early headgear (HG) treatment on craniofacial structures. The total study group comprised 68 children (40 males and 28 females) aged 7.6 years (standard deviation 0.3 years). The children, who had a Class II tendency in occlusion and moderate crowding, were randomly divided into two groups of equal size. In the first group, HG treatment was initiated immediately. In the second group, which served as a control group, only minor interceptive procedures were performed during the first follow-up period of 2 years. During the 8 year follow-up, orthodontic therapy, including fixed appliances and possible extractions, was carried out when necessary.
The results showed that the most evident difference between the groups was the wider and longer dental arches in the HG group, which could only partly be explained by the higher rate of extractions in the control group. For the cephalometric measurements, the most significant difference was in the maxillary plane orientation. The peer assessment rating (PAR) score, showing the general outcome of treatment, was at the same level in both groups at follow-up. The deficit of the early HG treatment was the longer mean total treatment time, resulting from the two-phase treatment.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  I. Pietila, T. Pietila, A.-L. Svedstrom-Oristo, J. Varrela, and P. Alanen Acceptability of adolescents' occlusion in Finnish municipal health centres with differing timing of orthodontic treatment Eur J Orthod, September 15, 2009; (2009) cjp085v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Krusinskiene, P. Kiuttu, J. Julku, A.-S. Silvola, T. Kantomaa, and P. Pirttiniemi A randomized controlled study of early headgear treatment on occlusal stability--a 13 year follow-up Eur J Orthod, August 1, 2008; 30(4): 418 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. K. Varlik and H. N. Iscan The effects of cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in the permanent dentition Eur J Orthod, August 1, 2008; 30(4): 425 - 430. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Kerosuo, M. Vakiparta, M. Nystrom, and K. Heikinheimo The Seven-year Outcome of an Early Orthodontic Treatment Strategy Journal of Dental Research, June 1, 2008; 87(6): 584 - 588. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
I. Pietila, T. Pietila, P. Pirttiniemi, J. Varrela, and P. Alanen Orthodontists' views on indications for and timing of orthodontic treatment in Finnish public oral health care Eur J Orthod, February 1, 2008; 30(1): 46 - 51. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. E. Harrison Evidence-based orthodontics J. Orthod., March 1, 2006; 33(1): 52 - 56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|