Skip to content

Comparison of two types of palatal bars during orthodontic treatment

Comparison of anchorage loss and arch dimension changes between conventional and twin transpalatal arch in patient with en-masse retraction :A Randomized clinical Trial

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2023/04/051421
Enrollment
40
Registered
2023-04-10
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-04-01

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

Conditions

Health Condition 1: M263- Anomalies of tooth position of fully erupted tooth or teeth Health Condition 2: K089- Disorder of teeth and supporting structures, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: Twin transpalatal arch: Twin transpalatal arch will be constructed using two straight 0.040 inch stainless steel wire. These wires will be bent in open square shape with dimension of 5m

Sponsors

All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1.Patients older than 15 years. 2.Patients with protruded maxillary incisors requiring first premolar extractions. 3.En-masse space closure with maximum anchorage. 4.Mild crowding ( 5.Full permanent dentition with sound first and second molars.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1.Absolute anchorage cases where microimplant is desired. 2.More than 3 mm crowding. 3.Missing /extracted or grossly decayed first and second molars. 4.Patients with systemic diseases, cleft lip and palate and other craniofacial abnormalities. 5.Patient on systemic drug therapy that can interfere with orthodontic tooth movement. 6.Poor Periodontal health.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To compare anchorage loss between conventional and twin transpalatal arch at the end of en-masse retractionTimepoint: At the start of en-masse retraction(T0) At the end of en-masse retraction(T1)

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
To compare maxillary arch dimension changes between conventional and twin transpalatal arch at the end of en-masse retraction Timepoint: At the start of retraction(T0) At the end of retraction(T1)

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Nikita Ghive

All India Institute of Medical Sciences,Jodhpur

drvinaychd@yahoo.com8003996704

Outcome results

None listed

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