Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2026
The Establishment of a Murine Maxillary Orthodontic Model
Published on: October 27, 2023
A comparison of two maxillary molar distalizing appliances with the distal jet
Donald J Ferguson1, Aldo Carano, S Jay Bowman
1Department of Orthodontics, Boston University Goldman School of Dental Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Aims:
Previous studies on maxillary molar distalization have usually concentrated on only one appliance and featured small sample sizes. The purpose of this retrospective study was two-fold: (1) to determine the skeletal, dental, and soft tissue effects of 3 molar distalization appliances, 2 of which do not depend upon patient compliance (ie, distal jet and Greenfield molar distalizing appliance) and 1 that does (ie, sagittal appliance combined with cervical headgear); and (2) to determine differences in treatment effects among the 3 appliances.
Methods:
Pretreatment and post-distalization cephalometric radiographs were obtained for each appliance (14 females and 11 males for the distal jet; 12 females and 13 males for the Greenfield molar distalizing appliance; and 17 females and 13 males for the sagittal appliance with headgear).
Results:
Pretreatment to transition evaluation showed significant distal movement of the first molars for the distal jet (3.4 mm), the Greenfield molar distalizing appliance (3.9 mm), and the sagittal appliance with headgear (2.1 mm). Distal tipping of the first molar was seen in all samples, but significantly more so in the Greenfield molar distalizing appliance (6.5 degrees +/- 6.6) and the sagittal appliance with headgear (13.5 degrees +/- 8. 1) than in the distal jet (3.2 degrees +/- 2.8).
Conclusions:
Maxillary molar distalization was effective using the distal jet, the Greenfield molar distalizing appliance, and the sagittal appliance with headgear, but better control of molar bodily movement was reported with the distal jet.
