Have a personal or library account? Click to login
An investigation of cephalometric and morphological predictors of successful Twin Block therapy Cover

An investigation of cephalometric and morphological predictors of successful Twin Block therapy

Open Access
|Aug 2023

References

  1. Tulloch JF, Medland W, Tuncay OC. Methods used to evaluate growth modification in Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:340-7.
  2. O’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Appelbe P, Davies L, Connolly I et al. Early treatment for Class II Division 1 malocclusion with the Twin-block appliance: a multi-center, randomized, controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:573-9.
  3. Tulloch JF, Proffit WR, Phillips C. Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinical trial of early Class II treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;125:657-67.
  4. Dolce C, McGorray SP, Brazeau L, King GJ, Wheeler TT. Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:481-9.
  5. O’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjie Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S et al. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:234-43.
  6. Franchi L, Baccetti T. Prediction of individual mandibular changes induced by functional jaw orthopedics followed by fixed appliances in Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2006;76:950-4.
  7. Patel HP, Moseley HC, Noar JH. Cephalometric determinants of successful functional appliance therapy. Angle Orthod 2002;72:410-17.
  8. Caldwell S, Cook P. Predicting the outcome of twin block functional appliance treatment: a prospective study. Eur J Orthod 1999;21:533-9.
  9. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement, Lancet 1986;1,8476;307-10.
  10. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Stahl F. Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;135:698.e1-10.
  11. Ahn SJ, Kim JT, Nahm DS. Cephalometric markers to consider in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with the bionator. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:578-86.
  12. Reynolds M, Reynolds M, Adeeb S, El-Bialy T. 3-d volumetric evaluation of human mandibular growth. Open Biomed Eng J 2011;5:83-9.
  13. Ruf S, Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: A cephaometric roentgenographic study. Angle Orthod 1997;67:271-6.
  14. Fleming PS, DiBiase AT, Sarri G, Lee RT. Comparison of mandibular arch changes during alignment and leveling with 2 preadjusted edgewise appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:340-7.
  15. Moons KG, Royston P, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ 2009;338:b375.
  16. Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P, Moons KG. Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model. BMJ 2009;338:b605
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2012-0016 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472
Language: English
Page range: 190 - 196
Submitted on: Mar 1, 2012
Accepted on: Jul 1, 2012
Published on: Aug 1, 2023
Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Padhraig S. Fleming, Usman Qureshi, Nikolaos Pandis, Andrew DiBiase, Robert T. Lee, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.