Evaluation of the Effects of Monoblock and Twin Force Appliances on the Dentofacial System

Küçükönder Abdurahman,Doruk Cenk

doi:10.23937/2469-5734/1510078

Abstract

Twenty patients who were referred to our clinics were selected for our study. These patients were randomly allocated to each of the two functional appliance groups. Of these, 10 were treated with Monoblock and the remaining 10 were treated with Twin Force appliances. The inclusion criteria were as follows: Class II division 1 malocclusion, retrognathic mandible, peak growth period, normal or low-angle growth pattern and increased overjet. Pre-treatment and posttreatment cephalograms were obtained to evaluate the dentofacial changes. The intra-group comparisons were determined with paired samples t-test, while the inter-group comparisons were determined with students t-test at the significance level of p < 0.05.

Highlights

Class II malocclusions are common anomalies in the orthodontic practice
While the Monoblock appliance was more advantageous in cases where the skeletal effect ratio was higher because the dental effects of the Twin Force appliance were greater than that of the Monoblock appliance, the Twin Force appliance was a more effective choice in case of lack of cooperative operation of the patient’s mobile functional appliance
Class II malocclusions are often treated by stimulating mandibular growth, inhibiting maxillary growth, or both [2]

Summary

Introduction

Class II malocclusions are common anomalies in the orthodontic practice. Class II Division 1 malocclusions are the most common malocclusions, and Sayin, et al [1] reported a 19% incidence of this malocclusion in their study. Class II malocclusions are often treated by stimulating mandibular growth, inhibiting maxillary growth, or both [2]. Some researchers studied the underlying skeletal incompatibility during growth modification, while others focused on the dental camouflage of jaw discrepancy [3]. Orthopedic treatment of malocclusions originating from the retrognathic mandible maybe performed with functional appliances that stimulate mandibular advancement [4]. Functional appliances are divided into two groups as removable and fixed functional appliances. Removable functional appliances maybe inserted and removed by the patient. The Monoblock appliance is the most commonly used removable appliance

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion