Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2
Aim of the study was to find out whether significant differences in skeletal morphology exist between Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2. Fifty-nine patients without previous orthodontic treatment showing Class II occlusion and distobasal jaw relation were evaluated by cephalometric analy...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of orofacial orthopedics 2005-11, Vol.66 (6), p.445-454 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 454 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 445 |
container_title | Journal of orofacial orthopedics |
container_volume | 66 |
creator | Lisson, Jörg A Pyka, Christian |
description | Aim of the study was to find out whether significant differences in skeletal morphology exist between Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2.
Fifty-nine patients without previous orthodontic treatment showing Class II occlusion and distobasal jaw relation were evaluated by cephalometric analysis.
Significant differences existed in skeletal morphology between patients with Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2, with only minor gender-specific differences: angleML/NSL in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.01) and females (p < 0.05) was smaller compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. angleML/NL was also noticeably smaller in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.001) and females (p < 0.01) compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. Patients with Class II, Division 2 had a smaller gonial angle (angleArGoMe), with the difference being significant only in males (p < 0.05). |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s00056-005-0515-3 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68873554</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68873554</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1445-fa0f69f5bdfbd3834bc22a081a66e1a959cabe532f62065e6ba89c1e0767296a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVUMtKw0AUHUSxtfoBbmRWrozOZB5JltL6KBQE0fVwk9yU0Tzq3Fbw753Qgrg593DPY3EYu5TiVgqR3ZEQwtgkQiKMNIk6YlNpI7GZ1MeRa6UTkxZqws6IPka3FvaUTaRVShptpux1gVsMne99v-b0iS1uoeUbCNCNAnHfc-jXLfKqBSIkvlze8Np_e_JDz2UU6_-v9JydNNASXhzujL0_PrzNn5PVy9Nyfr9KKqm1SRoQjS0aU9ZNWatc6bJKUxC5BGtRQmGKCko0Km1sKqxBW0JeVBJFZrO0sKBm7HrfuwnD1w5p6zpPFbYt9DjsyNk8z5QxOhrl3liFgShg4zbBdxB-nBRuHNLth3QR3DikUzFzdSjflR3Wf4nDcuoX9kVs9A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68873554</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Lisson, Jörg A ; Pyka, Christian</creator><creatorcontrib>Lisson, Jörg A ; Pyka, Christian</creatorcontrib><description>Aim of the study was to find out whether significant differences in skeletal morphology exist between Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2.
Fifty-nine patients without previous orthodontic treatment showing Class II occlusion and distobasal jaw relation were evaluated by cephalometric analysis.
Significant differences existed in skeletal morphology between patients with Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2, with only minor gender-specific differences: angleML/NSL in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.01) and females (p < 0.05) was smaller compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. angleML/NL was also noticeably smaller in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.001) and females (p < 0.01) compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. Patients with Class II, Division 2 had a smaller gonial angle (angleArGoMe), with the difference being significant only in males (p < 0.05).</description><identifier>ISSN: 1434-5293</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1615-6714</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s00056-005-0515-3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16331545</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Germany</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Child ; Dentistry ; Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Malocclusion, Angle Class II - diagnosis ; Odontometry - methods ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><ispartof>Journal of orofacial orthopedics, 2005-11, Vol.66 (6), p.445-454</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1445-fa0f69f5bdfbd3834bc22a081a66e1a959cabe532f62065e6ba89c1e0767296a3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16331545$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lisson, Jörg A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pyka, Christian</creatorcontrib><title>Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2</title><title>Journal of orofacial orthopedics</title><addtitle>J Orofac Orthop</addtitle><description>Aim of the study was to find out whether significant differences in skeletal morphology exist between Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2.
Fifty-nine patients without previous orthodontic treatment showing Class II occlusion and distobasal jaw relation were evaluated by cephalometric analysis.
Significant differences existed in skeletal morphology between patients with Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2, with only minor gender-specific differences: angleML/NSL in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.01) and females (p < 0.05) was smaller compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. angleML/NL was also noticeably smaller in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.001) and females (p < 0.01) compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. Patients with Class II, Division 2 had a smaller gonial angle (angleArGoMe), with the difference being significant only in males (p < 0.05).</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Dentistry</subject><subject>Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malocclusion, Angle Class II - diagnosis</subject><subject>Odontometry - methods</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><issn>1434-5293</issn><issn>1615-6714</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVUMtKw0AUHUSxtfoBbmRWrozOZB5JltL6KBQE0fVwk9yU0Tzq3Fbw753Qgrg593DPY3EYu5TiVgqR3ZEQwtgkQiKMNIk6YlNpI7GZ1MeRa6UTkxZqws6IPka3FvaUTaRVShptpux1gVsMne99v-b0iS1uoeUbCNCNAnHfc-jXLfKqBSIkvlze8Np_e_JDz2UU6_-v9JydNNASXhzujL0_PrzNn5PVy9Nyfr9KKqm1SRoQjS0aU9ZNWatc6bJKUxC5BGtRQmGKCko0Km1sKqxBW0JeVBJFZrO0sKBm7HrfuwnD1w5p6zpPFbYt9DjsyNk8z5QxOhrl3liFgShg4zbBdxB-nBRuHNLth3QR3DikUzFzdSjflR3Wf4nDcuoX9kVs9A</recordid><startdate>200511</startdate><enddate>200511</enddate><creator>Lisson, Jörg A</creator><creator>Pyka, Christian</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200511</creationdate><title>Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2</title><author>Lisson, Jörg A ; Pyka, Christian</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1445-fa0f69f5bdfbd3834bc22a081a66e1a959cabe532f62065e6ba89c1e0767296a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Dentistry</topic><topic>Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malocclusion, Angle Class II - diagnosis</topic><topic>Odontometry - methods</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lisson, Jörg A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pyka, Christian</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of orofacial orthopedics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lisson, Jörg A</au><au>Pyka, Christian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2</atitle><jtitle>Journal of orofacial orthopedics</jtitle><addtitle>J Orofac Orthop</addtitle><date>2005-11</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>66</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>445</spage><epage>454</epage><pages>445-454</pages><issn>1434-5293</issn><eissn>1615-6714</eissn><abstract>Aim of the study was to find out whether significant differences in skeletal morphology exist between Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2.
Fifty-nine patients without previous orthodontic treatment showing Class II occlusion and distobasal jaw relation were evaluated by cephalometric analysis.
Significant differences existed in skeletal morphology between patients with Angle Class II, Division 1 and II, Division 2, with only minor gender-specific differences: angleML/NSL in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.01) and females (p < 0.05) was smaller compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. angleML/NL was also noticeably smaller in Class II, Division 2 males (p < 0.001) and females (p < 0.01) compared to Class II, Division 1 patients. Patients with Class II, Division 2 had a smaller gonial angle (angleArGoMe), with the difference being significant only in males (p < 0.05).</abstract><cop>Germany</cop><pmid>16331545</pmid><doi>10.1007/s00056-005-0515-3</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1434-5293 |
ispartof | Journal of orofacial orthopedics, 2005-11, Vol.66 (6), p.445-454 |
issn | 1434-5293 1615-6714 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68873554 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Adolescent Child Dentistry Diagnosis, Computer-Assisted - methods Female Humans Male Malocclusion, Angle Class II - diagnosis Odontometry - methods Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity |
title | Determining skeletal parameters in angle classes II, division 1 and II, division 2 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T12%3A33%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Determining%20skeletal%20parameters%20in%20angle%20classes%20II,%20division%201%20and%20II,%20division%202&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20orofacial%20orthopedics&rft.au=Lisson,%20J%C3%B6rg%20A&rft.date=2005-11&rft.volume=66&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=445&rft.epage=454&rft.pages=445-454&rft.issn=1434-5293&rft.eissn=1615-6714&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s00056-005-0515-3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68873554%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68873554&rft_id=info:pmid/16331545&rfr_iscdi=true |