Dental and skeletal effects of combined headgear used alone or in association with rapid maxillary expansion

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of combined headgear used alone or in association with rapid maxillary expansion, as the first step for Class II malocclusion treatment. Methods: The sample comprised 61 patients divided into three groups: Group 1, combined headgear (CH); Group 2, CH + rapid maxillary expansion (CH + RME); and Group 3, control (CG). In Group 1, patients were treated with combined headgear until Class I molar relationship was achieved. In Group 2, the protocol for headgear was the same; however, patients were previously subject to rapid maxillary expansion. Results: Results showed distal displacement of maxillary molars for both experimental groups (p < 0.001), with distal tipping only in Group 1 (CH) (p < 0.001). There was restriction of forward maxillary growth in Group 2 (CH + RME) (p < 0.05) and clockwise rotation of the maxilla in Group 1 (CH) (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Based on the results, it is possible to suggest that treatment with both protocols was efficient; however, results were more significant for Group 2 (CH + RME) with less side effects.

Effects of Class II elastics in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

“…The control group consisted of individuals treated with the extraoral headgear associated with fixed appliances, which has been traditionally used for a long time, and its effects are widely described in literature, [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Other types of appliances, such as fixed functional appliances have been compared with the effects of Class II elastics. 4,16,18 At the pretreatment stage the groups were very similar ensuring that most likely the different changes produced in the groups are only consequent to the different devices used to correct the Class II malocclusion 25 (Table IV).…”