Ethically Accepted With Code 851/2971 A Comparison of Class Ⅱ Malocclusion Treatment Using Van Beek-headgear Activator Versus Andresen Activator
Not Applicable
- Conditions
- Class II Growth Modification
- Interventions
- Device: Van-Beek activator and a headgearDevice: Andresen activator
- Registration Number
- NCT05604625
- Lead Sponsor
- Al-Azhar University
- Brief Summary
The aim of this study is to compare the treatment results when treating Class II division 1 malocclusion using the Van Beek-Headgear Activator combination (vBHGA) appliance versus using the Andresen activator.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- ENROLLING_BY_INVITATION
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 24
Inclusion Criteria
- Class II division 1 indicated by ANB angle value ≥ 4º
- Class II division 1 with overjet > 5mm.
- An age range between 8 and 13 years growing patient using cervical vertebral stage assessment (CVS).
- No previous orthodontic treatment
- No indications or symptoms of periodontal disease in the past or present, as determined by clinical and radiographic examination
Exclusion Criteria
- Missing teeth (excluding 3rd molars).
- Craniofacial anomalies.
- Medical condition or prescription medication that may affect growth.
- Lack of compliance whenever documented in the charts.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Group A Van-Beek activator and a headgear 12 patients will receive Van-Beek activator and a headgear Group B Andresen activator 12 patients will receive Andresen activator
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method treating Class II division 1 malocclusion at 8 months rate of mandibular and maxillary growth
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Alazhar University
🇪🇬Cairo, القاهرة, Egypt