Modified Herbst Approach to Improve Chin Projection
NCT05597748 · Status: WITHDRAWN · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL
Last updated 2025-08-06
Summary
This study will collect data to try to assess which one of the two management options works better. The first option involves the use of the bite corrector first and then braces, while the second option involves the temporary addition of small support bone screws with the bite corrector later and then braces. Currently, it is not clearly known if there are important differences between the proposed management options. Such approaches are conventionally used in orthodontic practices. The information collected in this study will be used to compare the differences in the nature of the facial, teeth, and bone changes after the treatment. Questions about the experience while using the devices will be asked.
Conditions
- Class II Malocclusion
Interventions
- DEVICE
-
Modified Herbst Approach
A modified hybrid Herbst appliance approach (same hybrid Herbst appliance approach but with the addition of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in both arches) will be used (alternative treatment). In the upper arch, the TADs would be inserted in the paramedical palatal area. In the lower arch, they would be inserted buccally between the roots of the lower second premolar and the first permanent molar. Elastomeric chains will be used to link these TADs to the first molars in the upper arch and to a buccal bottom on the lower canines. Upper brackets will be initially bonded and upper incisors proclined until normal inclination values are attained.
- DEVICE
-
Conventional Herbst Approach
A hybrid Herbst appliance approach will be used (current available conventional treatment). The upper jaw component will be a maxillary expander secured on the first molar bands. The lower arch would have an uncemented lower acrylic full-coverage splint-type. In between Herbst-type pistons will be used.
Sponsors & Collaborators
-
University of Alberta
lead OTHER
Principal Investigators
-
Carlos Flores Mir, DSc · University of Alberta
Study Design
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Model
- PARALLEL
Eligibility
- Min Age
- 12 Years
- Max Age
- 15 Years
- Sex
- ALL
- Healthy Volunteers
- Yes
Timeline & Regulatory
- Start
- 2023-08-25
- Primary Completion
- 2025-07-31
- Completion
- 2025-07-31
Countries
- Canada
Study Locations
More Related Trials
-
Skeletally Versus Dentally Anchored Herbst Appliance
NCT04402164 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Crossbow Versus Forsus Springs in Mild to Moderate Class II Malocclusion Cases
NCT01530516 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Mandibular Advancement Planning Based on Clinical Overjet
NCT06653075 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Skeletal Effects of Herbst and Invisalign MA in Growing Patients With KLass II Malocclusion
NCT06409923 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: PHASE1
-
Early Treatment for Class II Division 1 Malocclusion With Twicare® and Herbst Removable Appliances
NCT02428621 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Dentoskeletal Effects of Two Different Fixed Functional Appliances for Correction of Class II Malocclusion: A Comparative Clinical Study
NCT05555719 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Treatment of Mild Class II Malocclusion in Adult Patients With Clear Aligners Versus Fixed Multibracket Therapy
NCT05684510 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Study the Effect of Upper Expansion Appliances on Lower Jaw Forward Projection/Growth
NCT03286569 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
The Effect of Different Treatment Modalities of Class II Malocclusion on Upper Third Molars.
NCT06098885 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
the Condylar Response of Mini-plate Anchored Rigid Fixed Functional Appliance Versus Dentally Anchored Semi-rigid One
NCT05466344 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: PHASE2/PHASE3
-
A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Effectiveness of the Two Different Appliances in the Treatment of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
NCT00957489 ·Status: TERMINATED ·Phase: NA
-
Removable Devices in Overjet Reduction
NCT06955637 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Study Between Two 3D Functional Appliances Herbst and Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA) on Posterior Airway Space And TMJ in Growing Class II Malocclusion Patients
NCT07094841 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Effects of Modified Fixed Twin Block Versus Removable Twin Block on Skeletal Class 2 Growing Patients With Mandibular Deficiency
NCT05993156 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Effect of Skeletally Anchored Herbst Appliance in Treatment of Skeletal Class 2 Due to Mandibular Retrusion
NCT04388046 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Comparative Effect of Clear Aligner Mandibular Advancement and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Malocclusion
NCT06609733 ·Status: COMPLETED
-
En-mass Retraction by KILBON Versus CAT Appliances
NCT06366737 ·Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Dentoskeletal Changes Associated With Herbst Appliance Therapy
NCT02456220 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Assessment of Different Orthodontic Tooth Movements Assisted With Low-level Laser Therapy vs. Injectable Platelets-rich Fibrin
NCT05966987 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: PHASE1
-
Effects of Skeletal Anchored Versus Incisal Capped Twin Block Appliance in Class II Malocclusion
NCT06209086 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Effectiveness of Modified Functional Appliance With Expander
NCT06116500 ·Status: ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING ·Phase: NA
-
Comparison of Efficacy of Three Orthodontic Appliances
NCT03450551 ·Status: UNKNOWN ·Phase: NA
-
Class II Correction Study Using the Invisalign System
NCT02376829 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
The Efficacy of Tow Mechanics for Total-maxillary-arch-distalization
NCT04814173 ·Status: COMPLETED ·Phase: NA
-
Upper Airway's Pressure Drop Analyses After Mandibular Advancement and Maxillary Expansion
NCT04190953 ·Status: RECRUITING ·Phase: NA