Methods: Twenty-two patients (11 males and 11 females; mean age 19.18 ± 2.00 years) having Angle's Class II division 1 malocclusion needing bilateral extractions of maxillary first bicuspids were recruited for this split-mouth randomized clinical trial. After the initial stage of alignment and leveling with contemporary edgewise MBT (McLaughlin-Bennett-Trevisi) prescription brackets (Ortho Organizers, Carlsbad, Calif) of 22 mil, followed by extractions of premolars bilaterally, 6 mm nickel-titanium spring was used to retract the canines separately by applying 150 g force on 0.019 × 0.025-in stainless steel working archwires. LIPUS (1.1 MHz frequency and 30 mW/cm2 intensity output) was applied for 20 minutes extraorally and reapplied after 3 weeks for 2 more successive visits over the root of maxillary canine on the experimental side whereas the other side was placebo. A numerical rating scale- (NRS-) based questionnaire was given to the patients on each visit to record their weekly pain experience. Impressions were also made at each visit before the application of LIPUS (T1, T2, and T3). Models were scanned with a CAD/CAM scanner (Planmeca, Helsinki, Finland). Mann-Whitney U test was applied for comparison of canine movement and pain intensity between both the groups.
Results: No significant difference in the rate of canine movement was found among the experimental (0.90 mm ± 0.33 mm) and placebo groups (0.81 mm ± 0.32 mm). There was no difference in pain reduction between experimental and placebo groups (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: Single-dose application of LIPUS at 3-week intervals is ineffective in stimulating the OTM and reducing associated treatment pain.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred and one sets of dental models of patients having CUCLP were assessed in this retrospective study. Five examiners that were blinded to case-specific information scored the dental models at two instances with an interval of two weeks to ensure memory bias elimination (5 × 101 × 2 = 1010 observations). Calibration courses were conducted prior to scoring and each examiner was provided with scoring sheets, pictures of GOSLON reference models and flowcharts explaining the scoring method.
RESULTS: According to GOSLON index, a mean (SD) GOSLON score of 3.04 (1.25) was determined. Based on treatment outcome groups, 62 patients had favorable (grade 1, 2, and 3) and 39 cases had unfavorable (grade 4 and 5) treatment outcome. Chi-square tests revealed a significant association of gender (P = 0.002), cheiloplasty (P = 0.001) and palatoplasty (P