1 resultado para Headgear
em Helda - Digital Repository of University of Helsinki
Resumo:
Class II division 1 malocclusion occurs in 3.5 to 13 percent of 7 12 year-old children. It is the most common reason for orthodontic treatment in Finland. Correction is most commonly performed using headgear treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of cervical headgear treatment on dentition, facial skeletal and soft tissue growth, and upper airway structure, in children. 65 schoolchildren, 36 boys and 29 girls were studied. At the onset of treatment a mean age was 9.3 (range 6.6 12.4) years. All the children were consequently referred to an orthodontist because of Class II division 1 malocclusion. The included children had protrusive maxilla and an overjet of more than 2mm (3 to 11 mm). The children were treated with a Kloehn-type cervical headgear as the only appliance until Class I first molar relationships were achieved. The essential features of the headgear were cervical strong pulling forces, a long upward bent outer bow, and an expanded inner bow. Dental casts and lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms were taken before and after the treatment. The results were compared to a historical, cross-sectional Finnish cohort or to historical, age- and sex-matched normal Class I controls. The Class I first molar relationships were achieved in all the treated children. The mean treatment time was 1.7 (range 0.3-3.1) years. Phase 2 treatments were needed in 52% of the children, most often because of excess overjet or overbite. The treatment decreased maxillary protrusion by inhibiting alveolar forward growth, while the rest of the maxilla and mandible followed normal growth. The palate rotated anteriorly downward. The expansion of the inner bow of the headgear induced widening of the maxilla, nasal cavity, and the upper and lower dental arches. Class II malocclusion was associated with narrower oro- and hypopharyngeal space than in the Class I normal controls. The treatment increased the retropalatal airway space, while the rest of the airway remained unaffected. The facial profile improved esthetically, while the facial convexity decreased. Facial soft tissues masked the facial skeletal convexity, and the soft tissue changes were smaller than skeletal changes. In conclusion, the headgear treatment with the expanded inner bow may be used as an easy and simple method for Class II correction in growing children.