Introduction: A parallel design randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare dentoalveolar and skeletal changes in two groups of patients who had completed twin block therapy; one group had a three-month night-time retention period whereas the other group had no retention period, after twin block therapy but before fixed applianc- es. Methods: 26 participants of Malay ethnicity aged 10 to 15 years were included in the trial and had an overjet of 5mm or greater, molar relationship greater than half cusp Class II on a skeletal Class II base which had been corrected to a Class I molar relationship following twin block therapy. Following randomization, the 26 were divided into two groups of 13. Group A had fixed appliances bonded immediately whereas group B continued wearing twin block at night for three months, after which fixed appliances were bonded. Lateral cephalograms assessed were those taken before randomization, upon twin block therapy completion (T1) and six months after bond-up of fixed appliances (T2). Results: Paired t-test showed several statistically significant dentoalveolar and skeletal changes in group A. In contrast, only condylar head position exhibited a statistically significant change in group B. Despite a statistical sig- nificance, changes measured in both groups were minimal at less than 2mm and therefore clinically insignificant. Independent t-test showed no statistically significant difference between the changes recorded in both groups. Con- clusion: The results suggest that a three-month night-time retention period after twin block therapy does not lead to any changes that may be considered clinically beneficial.
Introduction: The aim of the study was to compare the changes in the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures in Malay patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated by prefabricated re-mouldable customizable functional appli- ance (T4FTM) and Twin Block (TB) appliance. Methods: A randomised clinical trial was carried out with samples ran- domly assigned to active (TB appliance) and experimental (T4FTM appliance) groups. Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken for each subject and the overjet was clinically measured at the same intervals. 20 angular and linear measurements were chosen and measured separately. Results: Independent t test was used to compare the changes between the two groups. A significant difference between the groups was seen with overjet at 2.14 mm (p < 0.01), Sv_Pog distance at 1.83mm (p < 0.05), Sv_ii distance at 2.55 mm (p < 0.001), horizontal distance from the upper to the lower incisor tip at 1.81 mm which was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The other variables SNB and ANB angles too showed a significant difference. However, all the favourable changes were noted in the TB group. Conclusion: T4FTM appliance could be an effective appliance for the management of British Standard Institute's Class II Division 1 malocclusion on Class II skeletal pattern. However, the TB group differed significantly and had a more favourable correction in terms of the sagittal skeletal and dentoalveolar discrepancy.