Sandler Jonathan, Murray Alison, Thiruvenkatachari Badri, Gutierrez Rodrigo, Speight Paul, O'Brien Kevin
Consultant orthodontist, Chesterfield Royal Hospital, Chesterfield, United Kingdom.
Consultant orthodontist, Royal Derby Hospital, Derby, United Kingdom.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014 Jul;146(1):10-20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.020.
The objective of this 3-arm parallel randomized clinical trial was to compare the effectiveness of temporary anchorage devices (TADs), Nance button palatal arches, and headgear for anchorage supplementation in the treatment of patients with malocclusions that required maximum anchorage. This trial was conducted between August 2008 and February 2013 in 2 orthodontic departments in the United Kingdom.
The study included 78 patients (ages, 12-18 years; mean age, 14.2 years) who needed maximum anchorage. Eligibility criteria included no active caries, exemplary oral hygiene, and maximum anchorage required.
The primary outcome was mesial molar movement during the period in which anchorage supplementation was required. The secondary outcomes were duration of anchorage reinforcement, number of treatment visits, number of casual and failed appointments, total treatment time, dento-occlusal change, and patients' perceptions of the method of anchorage supplementation.
Treatment allocation was implemented by contacting via the Internet the randomization center at the University of Nottingham, Clinical Trials Unit. The randomization was based on a computer-generated pseudo-random code with random permuted blocks of randomly varying size.
A research assistant who was blinded to the group allocation recorded all data.
The patients were randomly allocated to receive anchorage supplementation with TADs, a Nance button on a palatal arch, or headgear. They were all treated with maxillary and mandibular preadjusted edgewise fixed appliances with 0.022-in slot prescription brackets. They were followed until orthodontic treatment was complete.
Seventy-eight patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio among the 3 groups. The baseline characteristics were similar in the groups, and they were treated for an average of 27.4 months (SD, 7.1 months); 71 completed orthodontic treatment. The data were analyzed on a per-protocol basis and showed no differences in the effectiveness of anchorage supplementation between TADs, Nance button palatal arches, and headgear. Compared with headgear, the average mesial movements of the maxillary right molar were 0.62 mm (-0.32 to 1.55 mm) with the Nance and -0.58 mm (-1.53 to 0.36 mm) with TADs; the maxillary left molar was moved -0.09 mm (-1.00 to 0.83 mm) with the Nance and -0.96 mm (-1.89 to -0.04 mm) with the TADs. Peer assessment rating scores were significantly better with the TADs than in the headgear and Nance groups. The patient questionnaires showed that comfort levels on placement of the TADs and the Nance were similar. Headgear was more troublesome and less popular with the patients.
There was no difference in the effectiveness between the 3 groups in terms of anchorage support. There were more problems with the headgear and Nance buttons than with the TADs. The quality of treatment was better with TADs. As a result, TADS might be the preferred method for reinforcing orthodontic anchorage in patients who need maximum anchorage.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00995436.
The protocol was published on the above site before the trial commencement.
The British Orthodontic Society Foundation funded the study and American Orthodontics provided all the TADs and associated equipment.
这项三臂平行随机临床试验的目的是比较临时锚固装置(TADs)、Nance 腭弓和头帽在需要最大支抗的错颌畸形患者治疗中补充支抗的效果。该试验于 2008 年 8 月至 2013 年 2 月在英国的两个正畸科进行。
该研究纳入了 78 名需要最大支抗的患者(年龄 12 - 18 岁;平均年龄 14.2 岁)。纳入标准包括无活动性龋齿、良好的口腔卫生以及需要最大支抗。
主要结果是在需要补充支抗期间近中磨牙的移动。次要结果包括支抗增强的持续时间、治疗就诊次数、偶然和失败预约的次数、总治疗时间、牙合变化以及患者对支抗补充方法的看法。
通过互联网联系诺丁汉大学临床试验单位的随机分组中心进行治疗分配。随机分组基于计算机生成的伪随机代码,采用大小随机变化的随机排列块。
一名对分组情况不知情的研究助理记录所有数据。
患者被随机分配接受 TADs、腭弓上的 Nance 按钮或头帽进行支抗补充。他们均接受上颌和下颌预调整方丝弓固定矫治器治疗,使用 0.022 英寸槽沟的托槽。随访至正畸治疗结束。
78 名患者按 1:1:1 的比例随机分为 3 组。各组基线特征相似。他们平均接受治疗 27.4 个月(标准差 7.1 个月);71 名患者完成正畸治疗。按符合方案分析数据显示,TADs、Nance 腭弓和头帽在补充支抗的效果上无差异。与头帽相比,Nance 组上颌右侧磨牙的平均近中移动为 0.62 mm(-0.32 至 1.55 mm),TADs 组为 -0.58 mm(-1.53 至 0.36 mm);Nance 组上颌左侧磨牙移动 -0.09 mm(-1.00 至 0.83 mm),TADs 组为 -0.96 mm(-1.89 至 -0.04 mm)。TADs 组的同行评估评分显著优于头帽组和 Nance 组。患者问卷显示,放置 TADs 和 Nance 时的舒适度相似。头帽给患者带来更多麻烦且更不受欢迎。
在支抗支持方面,三组之间的效果无差异。头帽和 Nance 按钮比 TADs 存在更多问题。TADs 的治疗质量更好。因此,TADs 可能是需要最大支抗的患者正畸支抗增强的首选方法。
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT00995436。
该方案在试验开始前已在上述网站公布。
英国正畸学会基金会资助了该研究,美国正畸公司提供了所有 TADs 及相关设备。