FindTrial
Sign In

Comparison of clinical efficiency of two different functional appliances in treatment of retruded mandible.

Comparative Evaluation of Dentoskeletal parameters using AdvanSync and Herbst Appliance in the treatment of Class II malocclusion - A CBCT Study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2020/09/027942
Enrollment
15
Registered
2020-09-21
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: K088- Other specified disorders of teethand supporting structures

Interventions

Intervention1: Advansync and Herbst appliance is used.: The efficiency of two Fixed Functional Appliances ( Advansync and Herbst) in correcting the dentoskeletal malocclusion in skeletal Class II pati

Sponsors

Dr Keerti Kaushik
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Patients in CVMI staging 2,3,4 2. Class II Malocclusion (ANB >4o) 3. Horizontal or average growth pattern 4. Minimum crowding in dental arch 5. Positive Visual Treatment Objective (VTO)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patients above CVMI staging 4 2. Class II Malocclusion (ANB 3. Vertical growth pattern 4. crowding in dental arch 5. Negative Visual Treatment Objective (VTO)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To evaluate and compare the skeletal and dental changes produced by AdvanSync and Herbst appliance using CBCT.Timepoint: Six months—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
NILTimepoint: NIL—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Keerti Kaushik

SGT Dental College

seemaortho@gmail.com9810636828

Outcome results

None listed

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