Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of class II malocclusion

Abstract

Background: The purpose of the current study was to analyze and compare the effects of the PowerScope Appliance and the Carriere Distalizer Appliance in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Twenty patients aged 14 to 18, with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion and showed for therapy with fixed functional equipment, were divided into two groups. (n1=10) for the PowerScope Appliance (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, Wis.) and (n2=10) for the Carriere Distalizer Appliance (Henry Schein company, New York, USA). Cephalometric analysis was performed on pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalogram. PowerScope and Carriere Distalizer appliances' skeletal and dentoalveolar effects were compared. Secondary outcomes included patient comfort and operator convenience. The PowerScope device restricted maxillary development while allowing substantial mandibular expansion, whereas the Carriere Distalizer did not cause any statistically significant correction in the skeletal component. There was no difference in treatment time seen with either appliance. There was no difference in treatment time seen with either appliance. Conclusions:The PowerScope appliance effectively corrects Class II Division 1 malocclusion in adolescent patients by promoting anterior maxillary displacement restriction with considerable forward mandibular repositioning, which minimizes both skeletal and soft tissue profile convexities.