[One phase or two-phase orthodontic treatment: comparisons]

Area of Science:

• Orthodontics
• Dentofacial Orthopedics
• Pediatric Dentistry

Background:

• Determining the optimal timing for orthodontic treatment initiation is complex due to varied therapeutic strategies.
• Class II, division 1 malocclusion presents distinct treatment timing challenges.
• Two primary approaches exist: early intervention during mixed dentition followed by later alignment, or solely during adolescent dentition.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the effectiveness of two-phase versus one-phase orthodontic treatment for Class II, division 1 malocclusion.
• To evaluate treatment outcomes including skeletal base correction and over-jet stability.

Main Methods:

• A comparative study involving 65 subjects diagnosed with Class II, division 1 malocclusion.
• Group 1: 33 subjects received one-phase treatment during adolescent dentition.
• Group 2: 32 subjects underwent two-phase treatment, commencing in mixed dentition, using the Distal Active Concept in both groups.

Main Results:

• The two-phase treatment group demonstrated significantly superior correction of the skeletal base.
• The two-phase approach resulted in a greater increase in diagonal mandibular dimensions.
• Improved stability of the over-jet was observed in the two-phase treatment group.

Conclusions:

• Early initiation of orthodontic treatment during mixed dentition, followed by a later alignment phase, is more effective for Class II, division 1 malocclusion.
• The two-phase approach offers enhanced skeletal and occlusal stability compared to single-phase adolescent treatment.
• Progressive functional improvements are suggested with the early intervention strategy.