COMPARISON OF RATE OF SPACE CLOSURE USING APPLIANCE WITH CONVENTIONAL AND NON-CONVENTIONAL ELASTOMERIC MODULES WITH PASSIVE SELF-LIGATING BRACKETS

Assessment and comparison of rate of space closure during canine retraction in appliance with conventional and non-conventional elastomeric modules with passive self-ligating brackets

Status

Recruiting

Phases

Phase 1

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2018/04/013197

Enrollment

Registered

2018-04-12

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: null- GOOD

Interventions

Intervention1: self-ligating brackets non-conventional elastomeric modules conventional elastomeric modules. : ASSESSMENT AND COMPARISON OF RATE OF SPACE CLOSURE DURING CANINE RETRACTION IN APPLIANCE

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Class 1 malocclusion with mild to moderate crowding Healthy patient without any systemic diseases. Good oral hygiene. Patient requiring all first premolar extractions

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patient with systemic and medical illness. Periodontally compromised dentition. Non extraction cases. Crowding >5mm

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To compare the rate of canine retraction in patients treated with self-ligation brackets, nonconventional elastomeric modules and conventional elastomeric modules in extraction caseTimepoint: T1-After completion of initial alignment. T2-After canine retraction.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
NONETimepoint: NIL	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactShabeer NT

Institute of dental studies and technology

drsaurabhsonar@gmail.com9810327188

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026