International journal of paediatric dentistry · 1998
The effect of two alternative methods of canine exposure upon subsequent duration of orthodontic treatment.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Iramaneerat S, Cunningham S J, Horrocks E N
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness, in terms of orthodontic treatment duration, of two methods of canine exposure.
DESIGN: This was a retrospective study using patients' records and lateral cephalometric radiographs.
SAMPLE AND METHODS: 50 patients were selected, 25 in each group. In all subjects the impaction was categorized as being 'intermediate'. The methods of canine exposure were: (i) simple surgical exposure; (ii) surgical exposure and placement of an orthodontic attachment, followed by flap replacement.
RESULTS: The treatment duration until the canine was in the line of the arch was 17.7 months in the simple exposure group and 19.3 months in the bonded attachment group. The mean treatment duration (from exposure to debond) was 28.8 months for both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of treatment duration, no significant difference could be demonstrated between the two methods of surgical exposure to palatally impacted canines.
DESIGN: This was a retrospective study using patients' records and lateral cephalometric radiographs.
SAMPLE AND METHODS: 50 patients were selected, 25 in each group. In all subjects the impaction was categorized as being 'intermediate'. The methods of canine exposure were: (i) simple surgical exposure; (ii) surgical exposure and placement of an orthodontic attachment, followed by flap replacement.
RESULTS: The treatment duration until the canine was in the line of the arch was 17.7 months in the simple exposure group and 19.3 months in the bonded attachment group. The mean treatment duration (from exposure to debond) was 28.8 months for both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In terms of treatment duration, no significant difference could be demonstrated between the two methods of surgical exposure to palatally impacted canines.