Effect of low pull headgear on head position
Objective: To evaluate changes in head position following the use of low pull headgear (LHG) and compare these changes with an untreated control group. Subjects and methods: The test group comprised pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 30 males, aged 11 ± 1.5 years, who were rece...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | Saudi Dental Journal |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013905212000788 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850185697972977664 |
|---|---|
| author | Santosh Kumar Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati |
| author_facet | Santosh Kumar Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati |
| author_sort | Santosh Kumar |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Objective: To evaluate changes in head position following the use of low pull headgear (LHG) and compare these changes with an untreated control group. Subjects and methods: The test group comprised pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 30 males, aged 11 ± 1.5 years, who were receiving LHG therapy for correction of Class II malocclusion. Pre-observation and post-observation lateral cephalograms of 25 untreated male subjects, aged 11 ± 1.6 years, served as controls. The average treatment time for the treatment group was 12 ± 2.02 months and the average observation period for the control group was 11 ± 1.03 months. Four postural variables (NSL/CVT, NSL/OPT, CVT/HOR, OPT/HOR) were measured to evaluate the head position in all subjects pre- and post-observations. Results: There was no significant difference in all the measurements concerning the head position within each group (p > 0.05). The mean differences of pre- and post-observations of 4 postural variables in the LHG group were 1.43, 0.9, −1.13, and −1.08, while those of the control group were 1.56, −0.32, −0.24, and 0.04, respectively. There was no significant difference between the headgear and control groups for any of the postural variables measured (p = 0.924, 0.338, 0.448, and 0.398, respectively). Conclusions: Although postural variables showed considerable variability in both groups, head position exhibited no significant changes over a period of 11–12 months either in the control or headgear group. Keywords: Craniofacial morphology, Growth, Headgear, Head position, Malocclusion |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-3db7160b09cb4e7998b07269ea1c14ad |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 1013-9052 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Saudi Dental Journal |
| spelling | doaj-art-3db7160b09cb4e7998b07269ea1c14ad2025-08-20T02:16:39ZengSpringerSaudi Dental Journal1013-90522013-01-01251232710.1016/j.sdentj.2012.11.001Effect of low pull headgear on head positionSantosh Kumar0Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati1Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka, India; Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 966 3050814; fax: +91 0820 2571966.Department of Community Dentistry, Manipal College of Dental Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, Karnataka, IndiaObjective: To evaluate changes in head position following the use of low pull headgear (LHG) and compare these changes with an untreated control group. Subjects and methods: The test group comprised pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 30 males, aged 11 ± 1.5 years, who were receiving LHG therapy for correction of Class II malocclusion. Pre-observation and post-observation lateral cephalograms of 25 untreated male subjects, aged 11 ± 1.6 years, served as controls. The average treatment time for the treatment group was 12 ± 2.02 months and the average observation period for the control group was 11 ± 1.03 months. Four postural variables (NSL/CVT, NSL/OPT, CVT/HOR, OPT/HOR) were measured to evaluate the head position in all subjects pre- and post-observations. Results: There was no significant difference in all the measurements concerning the head position within each group (p > 0.05). The mean differences of pre- and post-observations of 4 postural variables in the LHG group were 1.43, 0.9, −1.13, and −1.08, while those of the control group were 1.56, −0.32, −0.24, and 0.04, respectively. There was no significant difference between the headgear and control groups for any of the postural variables measured (p = 0.924, 0.338, 0.448, and 0.398, respectively). Conclusions: Although postural variables showed considerable variability in both groups, head position exhibited no significant changes over a period of 11–12 months either in the control or headgear group. Keywords: Craniofacial morphology, Growth, Headgear, Head position, Malocclusionhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013905212000788 |
| spellingShingle | Santosh Kumar Kalyana Chakravarthy Pentapati Effect of low pull headgear on head position Saudi Dental Journal |
| title | Effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| title_full | Effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| title_fullStr | Effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| title_short | Effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| title_sort | effect of low pull headgear on head position |
| url | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013905212000788 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT santoshkumar effectoflowpullheadgearonheadposition AT kalyanachakravarthypentapati effectoflowpullheadgearonheadposition |