Comparison of the effects of fixed and removable functional appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures

1 Ingervall B. Prevalence of dental and occlusal anomalies in Swedish conscripts. Acta Odontol Scand 1974;32:83-92. Search in Google Scholar

2 Kim YH. A comparative cephalometric study of Class II div 1 nonextraction and extraction cases. Angle Orthod 1979;49:77-84. Search in Google Scholar

3 McNamara JA. Components of Class II malocclusion in children 8–10 years of age. Angle Orthod 1981;51:177-202. Search in Google Scholar

4 Gianelly AA, Arena SA, Bernstein L. Comparison of Class II treatment changes noted with the light wire, edgewise, and Fränkel appliances. Am J Orthod 1984;86:269-76. Search in Google Scholar

5 McNamara JA, Bookstein FL, Shaughnessy TG. Skeletal and dental changes following functional regulator therapy on Class II patient. Am J Orthod 1985;88:91-110. Search in Google Scholar

6 Vargervik K, Harvold EP. Response of activator treatment in CI II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1985;88:242-51. Search in Google Scholar

7 Basciftci FA, Uysal T, Büyükerkmen A, Sarı Z. The effects of activator treatment on the craniofacial structures of Class II division 1 patients. Eur J Orthod 2003;25:87-93. Search in Google Scholar

8 Barton S, Cook PA. Predicting functional appliance treatment outcome in Class II malocclusions-a review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:282-6. Search in Google Scholar

9 Graber TM, Rakosi T, Petrovic AG. Dentofacial orthopedics with functional appliances, 2nd edn. St Louis,1997 Mosby-Year Book, Inc., 366-78. Search in Google Scholar

10 Heinig N, Göz G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid. J Orofac Orthop 2001;62:436-50. Search in Google Scholar

11 Jasper JJ, McNamara JA. The correction of interarch malocclusions using a fixed force module. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108:641-50. Search in Google Scholar

12 McNamara JA, Howe RP, Dischinger TG. A comparison of the Herbst and Fränkel appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:134-44. Search in Google Scholar

13 Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 9: Functional appliances to midcentury. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:829-33. Search in Google Scholar

14 Luder HU. Effects of activator treatment – evidence for the occurrence of two different types of reaction. Eur J Orthod 1981;3:205-22. Search in Google Scholar

15 Righellis EG. Treatment effects of Fränkel, activator and extraoral traction appliances. Angle Orthod 1983;53:107-21. Search in Google Scholar

16 Remmer KR, Mamandras AH, Hunter WS, Way DC. Cephalometric changes associated with treatment using the activator, the Fränkel appliance, and the fixed appliance. Am J Orthod 1985;88:363-72. Search in Google Scholar

17 Jakobsson SO, Paulin G. The influence of activator treatment on skeletal growth in Angle Class II: 1 cases. A roentgenocephalometric study. Eur J Orthod 1990;12:174-84. Search in Google Scholar

18 Ömblus J, Malmgren O, Hägg U. Mandibular growth during initial treatment with the Bass orthopaedic appliance in relation to age and growth periods. Eur J Orthod 1997;19:47-56. Search in Google Scholar

19 Schwindling F-P. Jasper Jumper™ ColorAtlas. Merzig, Germany: 1997, Schwindling, 5-94. Search in Google Scholar

20 Weiland FJ, Bantleon HP. Treatment of Class II malocclusions with the Jasper Jumper appliance – a preliminary report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:341-50. Search in Google Scholar

21 Karacay S, Akin E, Olmez H, Gurton AU, Sagdic D. Forsus Nitinol Flat Spring and Jasper Jumper corrections of Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2006;76:666-72. Search in Google Scholar

22 Ye J, Wang CL, Liu DX, Guo J, Zhang F. Clinical effect of modified Forsus appliance to children with mandibular retrusion. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2006;24:246-9. Search in Google Scholar

23 Liu YP, Zhou H, Zou M, Ming LF. Treatment of mandibular retrusion patients with Forsus appliance following growth spurts. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 2007;16:391-4. Search in Google Scholar

24 Ross AP, Gaffey BJ, Quick AN. Breakages using a unilateral fixed functional appliance: a case report using The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. J Orthod 2007;34:2-5. Search in Google Scholar

25 Weiland FJ, Ingervall B, Bantleon HP, Droacht H. Initial effects of treatment of Class II malocclusions with the Herren activator, activator headgear combination, and Jasper Jumper. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:19-27. Search in Google Scholar

26 Wieslander L, Lagerström L. The effect of activator treatment on Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1979;75:20-6. Search in Google Scholar

27 Jakobsson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on Class I Division 1 malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1967;53:446-57. Search in Google Scholar

28 Baccetti T, Franchi L, Mc Namara JA Jr. The cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of optimal treatment timing in dentofacial orthopedics. Semin Orthod 2005;11:119-29. Search in Google Scholar

29 Moore RN, Igel KA, Boice PA. Vertical and horizontal components of functional appliance therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;96:433-43. Search in Google Scholar

30 Pancherz H. Treatment of Class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1979;76:423-41. Search in Google Scholar

31 Pancherz H. The nature of Class II relapse after Herbst appliance treatment: a cephalometric long-term investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;100:220-33. Search in Google Scholar

32 Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment: a cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1982;82:104-13. Search in Google Scholar

33 Dahlberg G. Statistical methods formedical and biological students. London, United Kingdom: Allen & Unwin; 1940:122-32. Search in Google Scholar

34 Ehmer U, Tulloch CJ, Proftit WR, Phillips C. An international comparison of early treatment of Angle Class II division 1 cases. Skeletal effects of the first phase of a prospective clinical trial. J Orofac Orthop 1999;60:392-408. Search in Google Scholar

35 Cope JB, Buschang PH, Cope DD, Parker J, Blackwood HO 3rd. Quantitative evaluation of craniofacial changes with Jasper Jumper therapy. Angle Orthod 1994;64:113-22. Search in Google Scholar

36 Blackwood HO. Clinical management of the Jasper Jumper. J Clin Orthod 1991;25:755-60. Search in Google Scholar

37 Valant JR, Sinclair PM. Treatment effects of the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;95:138-47. Search in Google Scholar

38 Pancherz H. The effects of continuous bite jumping on the dentofacial complex: a follow-up study after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II malocclusions. Eur J Orthod 1981;3:49-60. Search in Google Scholar

39 Katsavrias EG. The effect of mandibular protrusive (activator) appliances on articular eminence morphology. Angle Orthod 2003;73:647-53. Search in Google Scholar

40 Cozza P, de Toffol L, Colagrossi S. Dentoskeletal effects and facial profile changes during activator therapy. Euro J Orthod 2004;26:293-302. Search in Google Scholar

41 Tümer N, Gülten A. Comparison of the effects of monoblock and twinblock appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveola structures. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116:460-8. Search in Google Scholar

42 Hirzel HC, Grewe JM. Activators: a practical approach. Am J Orthod 1974;66:557-70. Search in Google Scholar

43 Reey RW, Eastwood A. The passive activator: case selection, treatment response, and corrective mechanics. Am J Orthod 1978;73:378-409. Search in Google Scholar

44 Janson G, Caffer Dde C, Henriques JF, de Freitas MR, Neves LS. Stability of Class II, division 1 treatment with the headgear–activator combination followed by the edgewise appliance. Angle Orthod 2004;74:594-604. Search in Google Scholar