Palatal implants versus headgear for orthodontic anchorage - a randomised controlled trial
Completed
- Conditions
- Oral Health: OrthodonticsOral HealthOrthodontics
- Registration Number
- ISRCTN24433142
- Lead Sponsor
- Record provided by the NHS Trusts Clinical Trials Register - Department of Health (UK)
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Completed
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 40
Inclusion Criteria
Added July 2008:
The patients in the study all needed absolute anchorage, and no forward movement of upper molars could be allowed for successful treatment.
Exclusion Criteria
Added July 2008:
Poor oral hygiene, unwilling to wear fixed appliances, unwilling to wear headgear or have the implant placed, and medical history precluding fixed appliance treatment.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Tooth movement. The difference in the mesial drift of the buccal teeth to be calculated:<br>a. Relative to the cranial base using the Pitchfork analysis (Luecke and Johnston, 1992; Johnston, 1996) on the start and finish lateral cephalometric radiograph<br>b. Relative to the palatal rugae, from the start and finish study models (Hoggan and Sadowsky, 2001)
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method 1. Implant stability, discomfort and any signs of inflammation of the peri-implant tissues will be recorded with percussion tests using a Resonance Frequency Analyser (Meredith, 1998) and standard periodontal indices <br>2. Patient acceptability, compliance and discomfort measured using a questionnaire<br>3. Treatment outcome measured with the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index on the pre- and post-treatment study models