2007
DOI: 10.1111/j.1834-7819.2007.tb00484.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Contemporary Class II orthodontic and orthopaedic treatment: a review

Abstract: The literature regarding the dental and facial soft tissue effects of various forms of contemporary Class II orthodontic and orthopaedic treatment is reviewed. Treatment outlined includes the use of headgear and functional appliances to attempt to modify the facial growth process and the extractions of premolar teeth as part of overall fixed appliance treatment. The conclusions of numerous articles highlight the fact that many approaches to treatment can be successful in correcting Class II malocclusions. Find… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
10
0
4

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 46 publications
0
10
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…The need for patient compliance is a well-recognized factor for orthodontists to choose fixed functional appliances over removable appliances and headgear. 8,16 In addition, significant technological developments and new designs, along with ever-increasing marketing from manufacturers [16][17][18] Both headgear users and nonusers indicated that knowledge based on the current research and literature was the most influential aspect in their decision-making process (54% and 53% for orthodontists who use and do not use headgear, respectively). Of the orthodontists who indicated routine headgear use in their practice, 24% also indicated that the emphasis given to the headgear treatment modality during residency and therefore their familiarity with this appliance was the second important factor.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The need for patient compliance is a well-recognized factor for orthodontists to choose fixed functional appliances over removable appliances and headgear. 8,16 In addition, significant technological developments and new designs, along with ever-increasing marketing from manufacturers [16][17][18] Both headgear users and nonusers indicated that knowledge based on the current research and literature was the most influential aspect in their decision-making process (54% and 53% for orthodontists who use and do not use headgear, respectively). Of the orthodontists who indicated routine headgear use in their practice, 24% also indicated that the emphasis given to the headgear treatment modality during residency and therefore their familiarity with this appliance was the second important factor.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Class II Division 1 is one of the most common forms of malocclusion for which various types of treatment have been described in the literature [1,7]. According to the patient's age and severity of the malocclusion, functional jaw orthopedic treatment, camouflage therapy with premolar extraction and combined orthodontic and surgical therapy are available [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to the patient's age and severity of the malocclusion, functional jaw orthopedic treatment, camouflage therapy with premolar extraction and combined orthodontic and surgical therapy are available [7].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations