• Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop · Feb 1989

    Comparative Study

    A clinical study of maxillary canine retraction with a retraction spring and with sliding mechanics.

    • P Ziegler and B Ingervall.
    • Klinik für Kieferothopädie, Berne, Switzerland.
    • Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989 Feb 1;95(2):99-106.

    AbstractThe efficiency of maxillary canine retraction by means of sliding mechanics along an 0.018-inch labial arch and an AlastiK chain was compared with that using the canine retraction spring designed by Gjessing. The rate of canine retraction and degree of tipping, and rotation of the canines were studied in 21 subjects by one of these two methods on either side of the dental arch. Measurements were made in the mouth and on photographs of dental casts. The canine was retracted faster and with less distal tipping with the spring than with the sliding mechanics. The canine retraction spring was not superior to the sliding mechanics in controlling canine rotation during the retraction.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…