Skip to content

MOOSE Method vs. Traditional Measuring Method: Which Botox Technique Works Better for Youthful Upper Face?

Clinical Effectiveness of MOOSE Injection Technique over Traditional Measurement-Based Botulinum Toxin Injection Technique for Upper Face Rejuvenation A Comparative Randomized Control Trial - Nil

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2026/06/112758
Enrollment
30
Registered
2026-06-15
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-06-22

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

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Intervention1: GROUP A MOOSE TECHNIQUE PROTOCOL GROUP B MEASUREMENT BASED PROTOCOL: Pretreatment Assessment of group A One Comprehensive Facial Expression Evaluation the Patient instructed to produce

Sponsors

HRITHIKD
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Age forty to sixty five years male or female Systemically healthy with no significant medical conditions Visible glabellar lines forehead lines MAS Greater than equal to two Seeking aesthetic improvement with botulinum toxin No prior botulinum toxin treatment within past six months Written informed consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Known allergy to botulinum toxin type A or human albumin or components Neuromuscular disorders like myasthenia gravis Eaton Lambert syndrome amyotrophic lateral sclerosis Infection at injection sites Bleeding disorders or anticoagulation therapy Pregnancy or breastfeeding Body dysmorphic disorder Prior facial surgery or aesthetic treatments in upper face within six months Ptosis or anatomical abnormalities affecting eyebrow position

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
primary outcome is brow position improvement on the Merz Aesthetic Scale targeting a two point average improvement from baseline at day fifteenTimepoint: at baseline and fifteen days and four months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
secondary outcomes include aesthetic line reduction patient satisfaction four point Likert scale ptosis and other adverse events and dosage and treatment duration and eyebrow symmetry and inter rater reliabilityTimepoint: from baseline at day fifteen and fourth month

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactHRITHIKD

A.J. INSTITUTE OF DENTAL SCIENCES, MANGALURU

Ssorake@gmail.com9880296369

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Jun 29, 2026