Orthodontic Treatment in Adolescents With Crowding and Displaced Teeth
CrowdingTooth1 moreThe purpose is to fill knowledge gaps identified for orthodontic treatment using a novel study design that has not been implemented in the dental field or in orthodontics. The study design comprises an analysis, where outcomes of two techniques are assessed at several efficacy levels by different methods. Moreover, the project is designed to include a longtime follow-up that is unique in orthodontic treatment. The aim is to compare two techniques with buccally fixed appliance in a multicenter RCT of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years with crowding and tooth displacement. In the intervention group, patients will be treated with a self-ligating bracket system, and in the control group with a conventional bracket system. Outcomes will be assessed from the clinical, patients' and economic perspectives as: Tooth alignment, function and adverse side effects Patients' perception of pain, function and quality of life Cost-effectiveness.
Treatment of Unilateral Posterior Cross Bite in Children
MalocclusionMaxillary Expansion1 moreRapid maxillary expansion and quad-helix are two well established appliances in dentistry used for posterior cross bite treatment. This study aims to compare this two different appliances in patients in their early mixed dentition, regarding treatment effects of the extra oral soft tissue but also dental and skeletal effects, if the children experience any pain and discomfort during treatment and the study also aims to make a cost minimization analysis. Comparison of these different treatments are barely made and no randomized controlled trial is yet published. No study has evaluated the difference of subjective experience during these two treatments. After this study we will know which one of these two appliances are the most effective, regarding cost minimization and treatment result but we are also able to put it in relation to the patients subjective experience
Compartive Evalution of the Efficiency of Maxillary Canine Retraction Using Power Chain Versus Burstone...
Class I Malocclusionevaluate and compare the efficiency between elastomeric chains and burston T-loop retractors in terms of rate of maxillary canine retraction and canine movements
Effect of Skeletally Anchored Reversed PowerScope Appliance in Orthodontic Treatment of Patients...
Effect of PowerScope Appliance in Treatment of Patients With Class 3 Malocclusionthe PowerScope appliance is found to be efficient for the treatment of class II malocclusion. Accordingly, it appears valuable to investigate the efficiency of skeletally anchored powerScope in the treatment of class III malocclusion
Effects of Skeletally Anchored Maxillary Expander Via Two Approaches of Microosteoperforations
Posterior Crossbitestudy will be directed to evaluate two approaches of microosteoperforations during skeletally anchored maxillary expansion
Distalization Via Skeletally-anchored Distaljet Appliance With Two Approaches of Micro-osteoperforations...
Class II Division 1 Malocclusionstudy will be directed to evaluate two approaches of micro-osteoperforations during maxillary molar distalization.
A Comparison Between GUMMETAL and SS Orthodontic Wires in Space Closure
MalocclusionAngle Class IWhen there is space present between our teeth orthodontically we have the ability to close them through many methods. Using braces as our treatment modality this study will be investigating how efficient a new orthodontic wire is in closing tooth space. This new material is trade-named GUMMETAL and claims to have many benefits to treating patients orthodontically. We will be exploring its efficiency in space closure compared to an industry standard (stainless steel). We predict that the stainless-steel orthodontic wire will be more efficient at space closure than the new GUMMETAL wires.
Tow Maxillary Hybrid Expanders Screw Supported Versus Lateral Angulated One; a Prospective Randomized...
Cross Bitein this study i will use to different designs of t maxillary hybrid expanders that consists of HYREX supported with tow miniscrews to treat the collapsed maxilla in Yonge adolescents
TADs Anchored vs Conventional Anchored Carriere Motion Appliance
Class II MalocclusionCarriere Motion appliance (CMA) was designed to correct a Class II molar relationship into a Class I relationship by distalizing the whole posterior maxillary segment by means of class II elastics and mandibular anchorage. To revoke the adverse effects of CMA with class II elastics, we can use the CMA to distalize the maxillary posterior segment with TADs anchorage using miniscrews. The aim of this study is to evaluate TADs anchored CMA vs. conventionally anchored CMA for distalization of the maxillary buccal segment.
Mandibular First Molar Distalization
Class III MalocclusionA clinical study to test the capability of the mini-screws inserted in the Mandibular buccal shelf area as an anchorage unit to distalize mandibular first molar for correction of mild to moderate Class III cases. The second aim was to detect if there is a difference in the amount of distalization in the presence of unerupted mandibular third molars, using the same technique.