Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBüyükçavuş, Muhammed Hilmi
dc.contributor.authorKale, Burak
dc.contributor.authorAydemir, Buğra
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-31T07:28:44Z
dc.date.available2020-12-31T07:28:44Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationBüyükçavuş, M. H., Kale, B. & Aydemir, B. (2020). Comparison of treatment effects of different maxillary protraction methods in skeletal class III patients. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research, 23(4), 445-454.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1601-6343
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12566/587
dc.description.abstractObjective: The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes with different maxillary protraction methods in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion resulting from maxillary retrognathia. Setting and Sample Population: A total of 55 individuals consisting of 29 females and 26 males with a mean age of 11.4 ± 1.06 years were included in this study. Material and Methods: Fifty-five treated maxillary retrognathic patients who underwent different protraction facemask methods were evaluated. Eighteen patients treated with RME were in the first group, and 19 patients treated with a modified AltRAMEC protocol were in the second group; eighteen patients on whom face masks with miniplates were applied were included in the skeletal anchorage (SA) group. Thirty measurements were made on lateral cephalometric radiographs before and after treatment. Differences between the groups were assessed with the ANOVA test. Results: The mean age was higher in the SA group (11.96 ± 0.92 years) compared with the other groups. The mean ANB angle increased by 2.96°, 4.91° and 3.86° in the RME, Alt-RAMEC and SA groups, respectively. The forward movement of the maxilla was similar between the groups. However, while the rate of protraction was higher in the modified Alt-RAMEC group, a greater skeletal effect was found in the SA group. Conclusion: The most effective method in terms of skeletal effect is the application of the face mask with skeletal anchorage; the modified Alt-RAMEC protocol can be applied before face mask to obtain faster protraction.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipNo sponsoren_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherOrthodontics & Craniofacial Researchen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectAlt-RAMECen_US
dc.subjectFace masken_US
dc.subjectRMEen_US
dc.subjectSkeletal anchorageen_US
dc.subjectYüz maskesitr_TR
dc.subjectİskeletsel ankrajtr_TR
dc.titleComparison of treatment effects of different maxillary protraction methods in skeletal class III patientsen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryInternational publicationen_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000535105500001
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85085517171
dc.identifier.volume23
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage445
dc.identifier.endpage454
dc.contributor.orcid0000-0001-6828-8547 [Kale, Burak]
dc.contributor.abuauthorKale, Burak
dc.contributor.yokid192548 [Kale, Burak]
dc.contributor.ScopusAuthorID56644375200 [Kale, Burak]
dc.identifier.PubMedID32406170
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ocr.12389


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record