2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.pio.2010.04.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of mandibular growth and response to functional appliance treatment in prepubertal patients with different auxologic categories

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…this percent ratio should be from 62% to 65% and then the face grows without rotation. if the percentage is higher, the face grows with anterior and if the percentage is lower it grows with posterior rotation (3,15).…”
Section: Measurements Of Facial Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…this percent ratio should be from 62% to 65% and then the face grows without rotation. if the percentage is higher, the face grows with anterior and if the percentage is lower it grows with posterior rotation (3,15).…”
Section: Measurements Of Facial Growthmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The large variation in interindividual response to functional appliances may be due to several factors including compliance, appliance choice, growth potential, facial type, treatment timing, and skeletal maturity (Barton & Cook, 1997 ; Bishara & Ziaja, 1989 ; Carels & van der Linden, 1987 ; Celli et al, 2010 ; Tulloch et al, 1990 ; Woodside, 1998 ). Various cephalometric characteristics have been proposed to correlate to a favorable response to functional appliance treatment such as a low mandibular plane angle, low basal‐plane angle, high Jarabak ratio, short mandibular corpus and ramus height, short cranial base, and small anterior and posterior lower face heights (Kumar et al, 2013 ; Patel et al, 2002 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, many diseases are associated with the abnormality of circadian clocks in human rhythm [ 2 ]. Clinically, patients using orthodontic functional appliances at night demonstrate better treatment results than those using such appliances during the day [ 3 , 4 ]. Therefore, greater attention should be focused on the effects of circadian rhythm on muscle function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%