ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2021
Total maxillary arch distalization by using headgear in an adult patient.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the efficacy and predictability of distalization protocols for maxillary molars in Class II treatment with clear Aligners: A narrative review.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Review
- Orthognathic-Like Orthodontics: Management of Skeletal Class II Malocclusion in an Adult Patient.Cureus · 2024Article
- Molar Distalization by Clear Aligners with Sequential Distalization Protocol: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2024Review
- En-Mass Retraction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth with Severe Proclination and Root Resorption-A Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of Clear Aligner Therapy in Maxillary Molar Distalization for Class II Malocclusion: A Systematic Review of Clinical Studies.Journal of International Society of Preventive & Community DentistryReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although headgear is rarely used in adult patients, its use in adults is mainly for anchorage control. In the current case report, a 24-year-old patient had a skeletal Class I relationship with a Class II tendency, brachyfacial pattern, significant facial asymmetry, and dental 3/4 cusp Class II molar and canine relationships on both sides. The patient declined surgery, and facial asymmetry was not his concern. The final treatment goal was to achieve a stable Class I dental relationship and normal occlusion without significantly compromising the patient's profile. The patient was compliant with the use of cervical-pull headgear after he refused the options of orthodontic-orthognathic combined treatment, maxillary premolar extraction, or temporary skeletal anchorage mini-implants. A 5-mm maxillary arch distal movement was accomplished without significant distal tipping of the molar crowns. The active treatment duration was 31 months. Proper overbite and overjet, balanced occlusion, and an acceptable facial profile were achieved. The treatment results inspire reconsideration of the possibility of using headgear in dental Class II correction in adult patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.