European journal of orthodontics · 2022
Efficiency and outcome quality of Herbst-Multibracket appliance therapy in Class II:2 patients.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bock Niko Christian, Killat Sophia, Ruf Sabine
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective investigation was to generate representative data on the efficiency and outcome quality of Class II:2 Herbst-Multibracket appliance (Herbst-MBA) treatment.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All Class II:2 patients who had started Herbst-MBA treatment at the study centre since 1986 were included. Study casts from before treatment, after Herbst-MBA treatment, and (if available) after ≥24 months of follow-up were evaluated using standard occlusal variables, the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR)-Index, and the Ahlgren-Scale.
RESULTS: During treatment, the pre-treatment PAR score was reduced from 23.6 ± 7.66 to 5.6 ± 3.85 (n = 192); during the follow-up period, a slight increase to 6.0 ± 3.60 occurred (n = 127). The percentage of patients who could be assigned to the PAR category 'greatly improved' was 30% after treatment and 33% after follow-up; only 1%, respectively, 2% had to be assigned to the category 'worse/no different'. The outcome ratings according to the Ahlgren-Scale revealed 20% excellent, 32% good, 46% acceptable, and 2% unsuccessful results.
LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study design with follow-up data not available from all subjects and no data from untreated controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Herbst-MBA is an efficient treatment approach in orthodontic care of Class II:2 malocclusions. High-quality results (mean/median PAR score: 5.6/5.0) with very good short-term stability (2.2 years' follow-up) were achieved. Unfortunately, no appropriate control group or groups, where other treatment approaches had been applied, exist.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All Class II:2 patients who had started Herbst-MBA treatment at the study centre since 1986 were included. Study casts from before treatment, after Herbst-MBA treatment, and (if available) after ≥24 months of follow-up were evaluated using standard occlusal variables, the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR)-Index, and the Ahlgren-Scale.
RESULTS: During treatment, the pre-treatment PAR score was reduced from 23.6 ± 7.66 to 5.6 ± 3.85 (n = 192); during the follow-up period, a slight increase to 6.0 ± 3.60 occurred (n = 127). The percentage of patients who could be assigned to the PAR category 'greatly improved' was 30% after treatment and 33% after follow-up; only 1%, respectively, 2% had to be assigned to the category 'worse/no different'. The outcome ratings according to the Ahlgren-Scale revealed 20% excellent, 32% good, 46% acceptable, and 2% unsuccessful results.
LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study design with follow-up data not available from all subjects and no data from untreated controls.
CONCLUSIONS: Herbst-MBA is an efficient treatment approach in orthodontic care of Class II:2 malocclusions. High-quality results (mean/median PAR score: 5.6/5.0) with very good short-term stability (2.2 years' follow-up) were achieved. Unfortunately, no appropriate control group or groups, where other treatment approaches had been applied, exist.