|
|
||||||||
British Journal of Orthodontics, Vol 18, 267-275, Copyright © 1991 by British Orthodontic Society
REVIEW ARTICLES |
JR Mills
Orthodontic Department, UMDS, Guy's Hospital, London.
The findings of some 26 papers covering the results of Andresen and Frankel appliances, as analysed from cephalometric radiographs, are reviewed. These findings show a high degree of consistency. They have been combined to produce larger samples, and compared with a control group produced from reports of untreated Class II division 1 individuals, with consequent gains in statistical significance. Generally, there is no appreciable holding back of maxillary advancement in either group (although a slight relative reduction in the angle SNA). There is a slight mean increase in mandibular growth, mainly in a vertical direction. This seems similar to that reported by several authors in conventional appliances. There is a wide variation in response.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. Flores-Mir and P. W. Major A systematic review of cephalometric facial soft tissue changes with the Activator and Bionator appliances in Class II division 1 subjects Eur J Orthod, December 1, 2006; 28(6): 586 - 593. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. Brennan and S. J. Littlewood Twin-block Re-activation. J. Orthod., March 1, 2006; 33(1): 3 - 6. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |