American Journal of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 125, Issue 6 , Pages 657-667, June 2004

Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinical trial of early class II treatment

  • J.F.Camilla Tulloch, BDS, FDS, DOrth

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests to: Dr J. F. Camilla Tulloch, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, CB#7450, Brauer Hall, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7450, USA
  • ,
  • William R Proffit, DDS, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
  • ,
  • Ceib Phillips, PhD, MPH

      Affiliations

    • Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

Received 1 December 2003; received in revised form 1 February 2004

Abstract 

In a 2-phased, parallel, randomized trial of early (preadolescent) versus later (adolescent) treatment for children with severe (>7 mm overjet) Class II malocclusions who initially were developmentally at least a year before their peak pubertal growth, favorable growth changes were observed in about 75% of those receiving early treatment with either a headgear or a functional appliance. After a second phase of fixed appliance treatment for both the previously treated children and the untreated controls, however, early treatment had little effect on the subsequent treatment outcomes measured as skeletal change, alignment, and occlusion of the teeth, or length and complexity of treatment. The differences created between the treated children and untreated control group by phase 1 treatment before adolescence disappeared when both groups received comprehensive fixed appliance treatment during adolescence. This suggests that 2-phase treatment started before adolescence in the mixed dentition might be no more clinically effective than 1-phase treatment started during adolescence in the early permanent dentition. Early treatment also appears to be less efficient, in that it produced no reduction in the average time a child is in fixed appliances during a second stage of treatment, and it did not decrease the proportion of complex treatments involving extractions or orthognathic surgery.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 This project was supported by NIH grant DE-08708 from the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research and the Orthodontic Fund, Dental Foundation of North Carolina.

PII: S0889-5406(04)00160-X

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.02.008

American Journal of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume 125, Issue 6 , Pages 657-667, June 2004