Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Author
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keyword
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Issue
- Volume
- References
NARROW
Format
Journal
Article Type
Date
Availability
1-1 of 1
Zhong Zheng
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Journal:
The Angle Orthodontist
The Angle Orthodontist (2020) 91 (2): 267–278.
Published: 02 November 2020
Abstract
ABSTRACT Although headgear is rarely used in adult patients, its use in adults is mainly for anchorage control. In the current case report, a 24-year-old patient had a skeletal Class I relationship with a Class II tendency, brachyfacial pattern, significant facial asymmetry, and dental 3/4 cusp Class II molar and canine relationships on both sides. The patient declined surgery, and facial asymmetry was not his concern. The final treatment goal was to achieve a stable Class I dental relationship and normal occlusion without significantly compromising the patient's profile. The patient was compliant with the use of cervical-pull headgear after he refused the options of orthodontic-orthognathic combined treatment, maxillary premolar extraction, or temporary skeletal anchorage mini-implants. A 5-mm maxillary arch distal movement was accomplished without significant distal tipping of the molar crowns. The active treatment duration was 31 months. Proper overbite and overjet, balanced occlusion, and an acceptable facial profile were achieved. The treatment results inspire reconsideration of the possibility of using headgear in dental Class II correction in adult patients.