Comparison of two types of palatal bars during orthodontic treatment
Phase 4
- Conditions
- Health Condition 1: M263- Anomalies of tooth position of fully erupted tooth or teethHealth Condition 2: K089- Disorder of teeth and supporting structures, unspecified
- Registration Number
- CTRI/2023/04/051421
- Lead Sponsor
- All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur
- Brief Summary
Not available
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Open to Recruitment
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 0
Inclusion Criteria
1.Patients older than 15 years.
2.Patients with protruded maxillary incisors requiring first premolar extractions.
3.En-masse space closure with maximum anchorage.
4.Mild crowding ( <3 mm).
5.Full permanent dentition with sound first and second molars.
Exclusion Criteria
1.Absolute anchorage cases where microimplant is desired.
2.More than 3 mm crowding.
3.Missing /extracted or grossly decayed first and second molars.
4.Patients with systemic diseases, cleft lip and palate and other craniofacial abnormalities.
5.Patient on systemic drug therapy that can interfere with orthodontic tooth movement.
6.Poor Periodontal health.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare anchorage loss between conventional and twin transpalatal arch at the end of en-masse retractionTimepoint: At the start of en-masse retraction(T0) <br/ ><br>At the end of en-masse retraction(T1)
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method To compare maxillary arch dimension changes between conventional and twin <br/ ><br>transpalatal arch at the end of en-masse retraction <br/ ><br>Timepoint: At the start of retraction(T0) <br/ ><br>At the end of retraction(T1)