Publication:
Clinical implications of preformed archwire selection on the treatment of angle class I/II division 1 malocclusions in thais

dc.contributor.authorKittipong Dachaen_US
dc.contributor.authorPornrachanee Sawaengkiten_US
dc.contributor.authorJiraporn Chaiwaten_US
dc.contributor.authorMontip Tiensuwanen_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-11-23T09:43:21Z
dc.date.available2018-11-23T09:43:21Z
dc.date.issued2015-05-01en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2015, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. All rights reserved. Introduction: The dental arch forms were compared of untreated Class I and Class II div 1 malocclusions to those of non-customized preformed archwires manufactured by American Orthodontics, G&H, Highland, Ormco, RMO, and 3MUnitek. Arch forms of post-treatment Class II div 1 malocclusions treated by four 1st premolar extractions are also compared. Materials and Methods: Four metrics of archform shape and size (canine and 1st molar depth and inter-canine and inter 1st molar width) were measured on dental casts of 40 Class I and 22 Class II div 1 patients. These same metrics were also used to describe preformed archwire forms. Results: Non-customized preformed wires all showed significantly narrowed mandibular arch forms. This was true for maxillary archwires, with four exceptions. The Highland Natural Arch form, G&H True form I, and RMO natural preformed archwires showed both inter-canine and 1st molar widths statistically the same as mean dental arch widths in both the untreated and post-treatment Class II groups. In Class I patients, these three archwires showed only inter-canine widths equivalent to dental measurements. The Highland Progressive archwire matched only the 1st molar width in the untreated Class II group. Conclusion: None of these archwires – if used unadjusted, will produce a significant expansive force in either the maxillary or mandibular arch. Three maxillary non-customized preformed archwires showed both inter-canine and 1st molar arch widths statistically the same as Thai Class II div 1 dental arch dimensions. Using them to treat this malocclusion should minimally affect both pre and post-treatment maxillary arch form.en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Vol.9, No.5 (2015), ZC24-ZC29en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.7860/JCDR/2015/9658.5890en_US
dc.identifier.issn0973709Xen_US
dc.identifier.issn2249782Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-84928988237en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/35460
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84928988237&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleClinical implications of preformed archwire selection on the treatment of angle class I/II division 1 malocclusions in thaisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84928988237&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections