الفهرس Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 139 |  |  |
| | | from | 139 | | |
Abstract
Correction of deep bite problem through intrusion of maxillary incisors is done by several accepted treatment modalities. The comparative clinical performance of Burstone intrusive arch and miniscrew-supported intrusion has not previously been reported. Hence, the objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness of these two treatment modalities for maxillary incisor intrusion. Results: The mean amount of overbite correction was 2.6 ± 0.8 (0.49 mm per month) in the miniscrew supported intrusion group and 2.9 ± 0.8 (0.60 mm per month) in Burstone intrusive arch group. No statistically significant difference was found in the extent of maxillary incisor intrusion between the two systems. The two intrusion systems were statistically different in the extent of incisor proclination, as Burstone intrusive arch group tended to procline upper incisors more than miniscrews-supported intrusion group. Conclusion: Both systems successfully intruded the 4 maxillary incisors almost with no loss to the sagittal and vertical anchorage. Although intrusive arch tended to procline upper incisors significantly.