Evaluation of effect of PowerScopeTM class II corrector on skeletal, dental and Oro-pharyngeal airway dimension in Skeletal class II cases - A controlled prospective clinical study

Abstract

: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of PowerScope (Class II Corrector) on skeletal, dental and oro-pharyngeal airway dimensions in class II malocclusion with retrusive mandible. Twenty patients with age group of 11 to 14 were selected for this study. Experimental group underwent Power scope class II corrector therapy and control group, alignment of only upper arch respectively. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken in both experimental group and control group before and after 6 month of treatment. Sixteen measurements in that eight skeletal, five dental and three pharyngeal airway were assessed to know the effect of PowerScope Class II corrector on skeletal, dental and pharyngeal airway PowerScope Class II corrector after treatment showed significant change in SNB (P = 0.01*), ANB (P=0.001*), Inferior airway space (IAS) (P=0.006*), lower incisors position (P=0.0001*) and overjet (P=0.0001*) where as these values were insignificant on comparison with control group except for lower incisors position (P=0.001*) and overjet (P=0.0001*) indicating that PowerScope corrects class II malocclusion mainly by dento alveolar changes not have significant effect on skeletal and oro-pharyngeal airway. Power Scope (Class II corrector) corrects skeletal class II malocclusion mainly by dental changes and has insignificant effect on skeletal and oro-pharyngeal airway.

Three-dimensional evaluation of the efficacy of Powerscope appliance in treatment of skeletal Class 2 malocclusion: A prospective clinical study

“…Regarding the maxillomandibular relationship, there was a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) decrease of ANB angle that accounted for the minimal improvement of the sagittal intermaxillary jaw relationship. This was agreed with the results of studies (11,14,16,17,19,23,24,28) using PowerScope appliance and studies (20,21,22) using MARA, FFRD, and TFBC appliances. While a study (29) using Eureka Spring found no statistically significant change in the ANB angle.…”

“…There was proclination of the lower incisor with a statistically significant increase of IMPA by 8.65˚ ±5.38˚, this agreed with the results of studies (11,23,14,16,17) using Powerscope appliance in addition to studies (20,25,29,21,27,22) using MARA, Churro Jumper, Eureka Spring, FFRD, SUS 2 and TFBC appliances. The findings were against the results of studies (28,24) using the Powerscope appliance, which showed no change in the lower incisor inclination.…”

“…There was a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) retroclination of the upper incisor with the decrease in U1-SN, which agreed with the results of Powerscope studies (14,23,24,28) in addition to studies (25,26,21) using Churro Jumper, FNFS, JJ, and FFRD appliances. On the contrary, studies (11,19,16,17) using Powerscope˚ appliance and a study (22) using TFBC showed no change in the upper incisor inclination.…”

“…There was a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) increase in the lower anterior facial height (LAFH) which could be due to the distal movement of maxillary molars as a result of the distal force produced by the Powerscope appliance causing a wedging effect, this was agreed with the findings of studies (20,21) using MARA and FFRD. Other studies (17)(18)(19) showed no significant changes happened to the anterior facial height using the Powerscope appliance.…”

“…There was a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) decrease in SNA angle which indicated the effect of Powerscope appliance on the restriction of the maxillary base that was agreed with the results reported by other Powerscope studies (23,24,16) in addition to studies (25,26,27) using Churro Jumper, Forsus Nitinol Flat Spring (FNFS), Jasper Jumper (JJ) and Sabbagh Universal Spring 2 (SUS 2) appliances. On the contrary, studies (11,14,18,19,17) using Powerscope appliance and other studies (20,21,22) using Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA), Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FFRD) and Twin Force Bite Corrector (TFBC) appliances showed no statistically significant changes happened to SNA angle and consequently to the maxilla.…”