Cargando…

Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial

Objective: To evaluate whether patients who had received early class III protraction facemask treatment were less likely to need orthognathic surgery compared with untreated controls. This paper is a 6-year follow-up of a previous clinical trial. Design: Multi-centre 2-arm parallel randomized contro...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mandall, Nicky, Cousley, Richard, DiBiase, Andrew, Dyer, Fiona, Littlewood, Simon, Mattick, Rye, Nute, Spencer J., Doherty, Barbara, Stivaros, Nadia, McDowall, Ross, Shargill, Inderjit, Worthington, Helen V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5062052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27564126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14653125.2016.1201302
_version_ 1782459699724025856
author Mandall, Nicky
Cousley, Richard
DiBiase, Andrew
Dyer, Fiona
Littlewood, Simon
Mattick, Rye
Nute, Spencer J.
Doherty, Barbara
Stivaros, Nadia
McDowall, Ross
Shargill, Inderjit
Worthington, Helen V.
author_facet Mandall, Nicky
Cousley, Richard
DiBiase, Andrew
Dyer, Fiona
Littlewood, Simon
Mattick, Rye
Nute, Spencer J.
Doherty, Barbara
Stivaros, Nadia
McDowall, Ross
Shargill, Inderjit
Worthington, Helen V.
author_sort Mandall, Nicky
collection PubMed
description Objective: To evaluate whether patients who had received early class III protraction facemask treatment were less likely to need orthognathic surgery compared with untreated controls. This paper is a 6-year follow-up of a previous clinical trial. Design: Multi-centre 2-arm parallel randomized controlled trial. Setting: Eight United Kingdom hospital orthodontic departments. Participants: Seventy three 7- to 9–year-old children. Method: Patients were randomly allocated, stratified for gender, into an early class III protraction facemask group (PFG) (n = 35) and a control/no treatment group (CG) (n = 38). The primary outcome, need for orthognathic surgery was assessed by panel consensus. Secondary outcomes were changed in skeletal pattern, overjet, Peer Assessment Rating (PAR), self-esteem and the oral aesthetic impact of malocclusion. The data were compared between baseline (DC1) and 6-year follow-up (DC4). A per-protocol analysis was carried out with n = 32 in the CG and n = 33 in the PFG. Results: Thirty six percent of the PFG needed orthognathic surgery, compared with 66% of the CG (P = 0.027). The odds of needing surgery was 3.5 times more likely when protraction facemask treatment was not used (odds ratio = 3.34 95% CI 1.21–9.24). The PFG exhibited a clockwise rotation and the CG an anti-clockwise rotation in the maxilla (regression coefficient 8.24 (SE 0.75); 95% CI 6.73–9.75; P < 0.001) and the mandible (regression coefficient 6.72 (SE 0.73); 95% CI 5.27–8.18; P < 0.001). Sixty eight per cent of the PFG maintained a positive overjet at 6-year follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences between the PFG and CG for skeletal/occlusal improvement, self-esteem or oral aesthetic impact. Conclusions: Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery. However, this effect cannot be explained by the maintenance of skeletal cephalometric change.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5062052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50620522016-11-01 Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial Mandall, Nicky Cousley, Richard DiBiase, Andrew Dyer, Fiona Littlewood, Simon Mattick, Rye Nute, Spencer J. Doherty, Barbara Stivaros, Nadia McDowall, Ross Shargill, Inderjit Worthington, Helen V. J Orthod Scientific Section Objective: To evaluate whether patients who had received early class III protraction facemask treatment were less likely to need orthognathic surgery compared with untreated controls. This paper is a 6-year follow-up of a previous clinical trial. Design: Multi-centre 2-arm parallel randomized controlled trial. Setting: Eight United Kingdom hospital orthodontic departments. Participants: Seventy three 7- to 9–year-old children. Method: Patients were randomly allocated, stratified for gender, into an early class III protraction facemask group (PFG) (n = 35) and a control/no treatment group (CG) (n = 38). The primary outcome, need for orthognathic surgery was assessed by panel consensus. Secondary outcomes were changed in skeletal pattern, overjet, Peer Assessment Rating (PAR), self-esteem and the oral aesthetic impact of malocclusion. The data were compared between baseline (DC1) and 6-year follow-up (DC4). A per-protocol analysis was carried out with n = 32 in the CG and n = 33 in the PFG. Results: Thirty six percent of the PFG needed orthognathic surgery, compared with 66% of the CG (P = 0.027). The odds of needing surgery was 3.5 times more likely when protraction facemask treatment was not used (odds ratio = 3.34 95% CI 1.21–9.24). The PFG exhibited a clockwise rotation and the CG an anti-clockwise rotation in the maxilla (regression coefficient 8.24 (SE 0.75); 95% CI 6.73–9.75; P < 0.001) and the mandible (regression coefficient 6.72 (SE 0.73); 95% CI 5.27–8.18; P < 0.001). Sixty eight per cent of the PFG maintained a positive overjet at 6-year follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences between the PFG and CG for skeletal/occlusal improvement, self-esteem or oral aesthetic impact. Conclusions: Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery. However, this effect cannot be explained by the maintenance of skeletal cephalometric change. Taylor & Francis 2016-07-02 2016-08-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5062052/ /pubmed/27564126 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14653125.2016.1201302 Text en © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
spellingShingle Scientific Section
Mandall, Nicky
Cousley, Richard
DiBiase, Andrew
Dyer, Fiona
Littlewood, Simon
Mattick, Rye
Nute, Spencer J.
Doherty, Barbara
Stivaros, Nadia
McDowall, Ross
Shargill, Inderjit
Worthington, Helen V.
Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title_full Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title_fullStr Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title_short Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
title_sort early class iii protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial
topic Scientific Section
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5062052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27564126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14653125.2016.1201302
work_keys_str_mv AT mandallnicky earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT cousleyrichard earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dibiaseandrew earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dyerfiona earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT littlewoodsimon earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mattickrye earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT nutespencerj earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dohertybarbara earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT stivarosnadia earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mcdowallross earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT shargillinderjit earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT worthingtonhelenv earlyclassiiiprotractionfacemasktreatmentreducestheneedfororthognathicsurgeryamulticentretwoarmparallelrandomizedcontrolledtrial