Class II Division 1 MalocclusionNCT03296644
Comparison of Treatment Effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Using CBCT
A study testing Class II correction using PowerScope2 and Class II correction using Forsus in people with Class II Division 1 Malocclusion, run by Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences Rohtak at 1 site in India.
Trial summary
The main objective of this prospective, controlled clinical study is: 1. To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in patients with Class II divison1 malocclusion. 2. To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device with the control group. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 12 to 17 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- What is being tested?
- Class II correction using PowerScope2 and Class II correction using Forsus
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 42 participants
- Where
- 1 siteIndia
- Study dates
- 16 Aug 2016to Apr 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 12 to 17 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Patients in active growth period
- Skeletal Class II malocclusion
- Normal or mildly prognathic maxilla
- Retrognathic mandible.
- Increased overjet, not less than 5 mm.
- Horizontal to average growth pattern
Show all 15Show fewer
- Positive pretreatment visual treatment objective (VTO).
- Minimum crowding in dental arches.
- Treatment completed without any permanent teeth extracted (excluding third molars).
- Exclusion Criteria:• Subjects with a history of orthodontic treatment
- Anterior open bite
- Severe proclination and crowding of anterior teeth
- Any systemic disease affecting bone and generalgrowth
- Vertical growth pattern
- Patient who fails to follow up or undergo complete treatment
Who cannot join
None listed.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: "Evaluation of Treatment Effects of Two Different Fixed Functional Appliances in Patients With Class II Div 1 Malocclusion Using CBCT- A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study"
The main objective of this prospective, controlled clinical study is:
- To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in patients with Class II divison1 malocclusion.
- To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device with the control group.
The null hypothesis for this study is that Forsus and PowerScope2 are equally effective in the treatment of ClassII div1 malocclusion.
Read the detailed description
Class II malocclusion is one of the most frequent problems in orthodontics ,as it affects one third of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. McNamara reported mandibular retrusion as the most common characteristic of Class II malocclusion rather than maxillary prognathism. Functional orthopaedic appliances are widely used to treat Class II malocclusion in growing patients .Contrary to removable appliances, fixed devices do not require patient collaboration and can be worn in association with multibracket therepy, so that class II malocclusion can be corrected in a single phase treatment.
.Most popular flexible devices are the Jasper Jumper, Eureka spring, and the Forsus device (FRD)Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device [FRD]is a three piece (L pin module) or two-piece (EZ2 module) system, composed of a telescoping spring that attaches at upper first molar and a push rod linked to lower archwire, distal to either the canine or first premolar bracket. The FRD spring and rod create an equal and opposite force to maxillary and mandibular dentition.1The clinical application of the FRD was described by Vogt in 2006.PowerScope is one of the latest innovation in Class II correction developed by Dr. Andy Hayes. Inventors claims the following advantages of powerscope over other functional appliances. It is delivered as a one-size-fits-all appliance pre-assembled with attachment nuts for quick and easy chairside application .
The appliance is a wire-to-wire installation with attachments placed mesial to the first molar in the maxillary arch and distal to the canine of the mandibular arch. Internal NiTi spring mechanism delivers 260 gms of force for continous activation during treatment.
The dental, skeletal and soft tissue short-term effects of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment combined with ForsusTM in ClassII patients have been evaluated previously. However no previous study compared the posttreatment effects of PowerScope2TM and ForsusTM.The purpose of this controlled clinical study is to evaluate the treatment and posttreatment effects induced by PowerScope2 in growing patients with ClassII malocclusion and to compare it with Forsus(FRD) on CBCT.
The majority of the studies examined the changes of the upper airway through lateral cephalometric radiography. This method limited the accuracy of airway measurement since the two-dimensional (2D) images only allowed an anteroposterior dimension measurement in sagittal plane, and failed to provide a full-scaled view of the upper airway. Therefore, 3D evaluation of the upper airway in growing patients during fixed functional appliance treatment needs to be established .Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is an acceptable technique for 3D volumetric depiction and morphological evaluation of the upper airway using a lower-radiation method with a greater spatial resolution . It allows 3D registration of pre- and post-treatment data through identification of specific structures in the cranial base. Therefore, the changes of the upper airway before and after mandibular advancement can be precisely evaluated. As the patients involved in our research were underage, their normal development may affect on the upper airway morphology during the treatment period. Thus, an untreated control group is needed. In the present study, the control group was selected from records of patients with the same diagnosis who just began orthodontic treatment, and matches well with the post-treatment patients of fixed functional appliance group through age, sex and development condition strategy, so that effects of fixed functional appliance on the upper airway morphology can be evaluated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS- Ours is a prospective, non-pharmacological, double blind, randomized controlled clinical study to compare the treatment effects of two different fixed functional appliances, Forsus and PowerScope2. The present study will be conducted in the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, PGIDS, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak.
Ethical clearance- The study will be carried out after the institutional approval for use in humans.
Source of data:- The sample size consists of 63 subjects who were selected from the patients attending regular OPD at the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics for orthodontic treatment.
TARGET SAMPLE SIZE Nearly 21 subjects per group and 63 in total should be an ideal sample size including 10% dropout for the proposed study to have a power of 90% and a standard error of significance to be 0.05.
INFORMED CONSENT OF THE PATIENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE RANDOMISED A valid, informed written consent of the patient or parent/ guardian and an agreement to be randomized was obtained from the patient before registering the patient in this clinical study. Patient or parent/ guardian was informed about all the theoretical risks and benefits of the intervention under test. Risks and hazards of radiation during CBCT were also explained to the patient.
INTERVENTION AND DESIGN OF STUDY
The main intervention in this clinical study is placement of 2 different fixed functional appliances after initial levelling and alignment of dental arches. The study consists of 3 groups with equal allocation of subjects in each group-
G1- This group received Powerscope2 appliance bilaterally G2-This group received Forsus bilaterally (as per size suitable for the individual.
G3-The control group wiil be selected from patients with same diagnosis who just began orthodontic treatment, and matches well with the post treatment patients of Powerscope2 and Forsus through age, sex and development condition.
Selection of subjects in intervention groups (patients meeting selection criteria)
Treatment with 0.022 MBT preadjusted edgewise appliance
Maxillary and mandibular arches will be stabilized with the help of 0.019" × 0.025" stainless steel wire, reverse torque will be introduced in the lower anterior segment and wires will be cinched back distal to 2ndmolars.
Patient were randomly allocated into 2 groups.
1 PowerScope2 (G1) 2. Forsus (G2)
Pretreatment diagnostic records including lateral cephalogram were taken. CBCT was taken before insertion and after removal of the fixed functional appliance.
Insertion of fixed functional appliance as per the group allocated. Regular follow up till the completion of functional phase of treatment will be done. Patients will undergo functional appliance phase till Class I molar relationship is achieved.
RANDOMISATION \& ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT The subjects were randomly allocated by a sealed opaque envelope method. The study subjects were blinded regarding intervention group. Allocated appliance was inserted on the patient.
DATA COLLECTION AND CBCT ANALYSIS
The investigator recorded the patients' name, address and contact number. CBCT will be recorded before placement of fixed functional appliance and immediately after its removal in order to evaluate changes caused by the functional appliances.
To check patient comfort, all patients were given a questionnaire to investigate the patient's experiences with PowerScope2 and Forsus. The questionnaire was designed in English and then verbally translated into the patients and parents native language at the installation appointment though all the patients and their parents could read and understand it in English.
Prefunctional and postfunctional profile photographs of the treatment groups (G1 and G2) patients and those of control will be presented to 5 orthodontists, 5 patients, 5 parents and 5 laypersons.The raters will assess changes in facial appearance on a visual analog scale.
CBCT Data Acquisition The pre-treatment and post-treatment CBCT scans of two intervention groups (G1 \& G2) and the CBCT of control group (G3) will be collected and analysed.
During CBCT scan, patients will be instructed to maintain an upright posture and natural head position. The CBCT scans will be performed at rest position of the tongue (tongue in contact with anterior palate without touching the anterior teeth) and maximum intercuspation. All of the scans will be performed by the same researcher.
DATA COLLECTION \& INTERPRETATION Data will be collected, properly arranged and a CONSORT flow chart will be made to derive final sample size and calculate number of exclusions.
Statistical analysis:-The data recorded will be processed by standard statistical analysis.
- Conditions
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- Being tested
- Class II correction using PowerScope2, Class II correction using Forsus
- Medical subject headings
- Malocclusion, Angle Class II
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Class II correction using PowerScope2Device
Class II correction using ForsusDevice
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| PowerScope2 group (G1) | Active comparator | Class II correction using PowerScope2 Receives: Device: Class II correction using PowerScope2 |
| Forsus group (G2) | Active comparator | Class II correction using Forsus Receives: Device: Class II correction using Forsus |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
mandibular length
changes in mandibular length after intervention
Measured: 20 months
oropharyngeal volume
changes in oropharyngeal volumes after intervention
Measured: 20 months
condylar changes
condylar changes after intervention
Measured: 20 months
patient experiences
patient experiences with Forsus and PowerScope
Measured: 20 months
pancherz analysis
pancherz analysis after intervention
Measured: 20 months
soft tissue changes
soft tissue changes after intervention
Measured: 20 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Sep 2017
- Study start16 Aug 2016
- Primary completionApr 2018
- Study completionApr 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Class II Division 1 MalocclusionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences RohtakThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences Rohtak
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Sonal Chowdhary, Principal investigator, Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03296644
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- sonal ortho
- Status last verified
- Apr 2019
- First submitted
- 9 Sep 2017
- Last updated
- 29 Apr 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Apr 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- "Evaluation of Treatment Effects of Two Different Fixed Functional Appliances in Patients With Class II Div 1 Malocclusion Using CBCT- A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study"
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03296644
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- sonal ortho
- Conditions
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 42 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences RohtakUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 16 Aug 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Apr 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The main objective of this prospective, controlled clinical study is:
- To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in patients with Class II divison1 malocclusion.
- To compare the treatment effects of PowerScope2 and Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device with the control group.
The null hypothesis for this study is that Forsus and PowerScope2 are equally effective in the treatment of ClassII div1 malocclusion.
Detailed description
Class II malocclusion is one of the most frequent problems in orthodontics ,as it affects one third of patients seeking orthodontic treatment. McNamara reported mandibular retrusion as the most common characteristic of Class II malocclusion rather than maxillary prognathism. Functional orthopaedic appliances are widely used to treat Class II malocclusion in growing patients .Contrary to removable appliances, fixed devices do not require patient collaboration and can be worn in association with multibracket therepy, so that class II malocclusion can be corrected in a single phase treatment.
.Most popular flexible devices are the Jasper Jumper, Eureka spring, and the Forsus device (FRD)Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device [FRD]is a three piece (L pin module) or two-piece (EZ2 module) system, composed of a telescoping spring that attaches at upper first molar and a push rod linked to lower archwire, distal to either the canine or first premolar bracket. The FRD spring and rod create an equal and opposite force to maxillary and mandibular dentition.1The clinical application of the FRD was described by Vogt in 2006.PowerScope is one of the latest innovation in Class II correction developed by Dr. Andy Hayes. Inventors claims the following advantages of powerscope over other functional appliances. It is delivered as a one-size-fits-all appliance pre-assembled with attachment nuts for quick and easy chairside application .
The appliance is a wire-to-wire installation with attachments placed mesial to the first molar in the maxillary arch and distal to the canine of the mandibular arch. Internal NiTi spring mechanism delivers 260 gms of force for continous activation during treatment.
The dental, skeletal and soft tissue short-term effects of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment combined with ForsusTM in ClassII patients have been evaluated previously. However no previous study compared the posttreatment effects of PowerScope2TM and ForsusTM.The purpose of this controlled clinical study is to evaluate the treatment and posttreatment effects induced by PowerScope2 in growing patients with ClassII malocclusion and to compare it with Forsus(FRD) on CBCT.
The majority of the studies examined the changes of the upper airway through lateral cephalometric radiography. This method limited the accuracy of airway measurement since the two-dimensional (2D) images only allowed an anteroposterior dimension measurement in sagittal plane, and failed to provide a full-scaled view of the upper airway. Therefore, 3D evaluation of the upper airway in growing patients during fixed functional appliance treatment needs to be established .Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is an acceptable technique for 3D volumetric depiction and morphological evaluation of the upper airway using a lower-radiation method with a greater spatial resolution . It allows 3D registration of pre- and post-treatment data through identification of specific structures in the cranial base. Therefore, the changes of the upper airway before and after mandibular advancement can be precisely evaluated. As the patients involved in our research were underage, their normal development may affect on the upper airway morphology during the treatment period. Thus, an untreated control group is needed. In the present study, the control group was selected from records of patients with the same diagnosis who just began orthodontic treatment, and matches well with the post-treatment patients of fixed functional appliance group through age, sex and development condition strategy, so that effects of fixed functional appliance on the upper airway morphology can be evaluated.
MATERIALS AND METHODS- Ours is a prospective, non-pharmacological, double blind, randomized controlled clinical study to compare the treatment effects of two different fixed functional appliances, Forsus and PowerScope2. The present study will be conducted in the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, PGIDS, Pt. B.D. Sharma University of Health Sciences, Rohtak.
Ethical clearance- The study will be carried out after the institutional approval for use in humans.
Source of data:- The sample size consists of 63 subjects who were selected from the patients attending regular OPD at the Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics for orthodontic treatment.
TARGET SAMPLE SIZE Nearly 21 subjects per group and 63 in total should be an ideal sample size including 10% dropout for the proposed study to have a power of 90% and a standard error of significance to be 0.05.
INFORMED CONSENT OF THE PATIENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE RANDOMISED A valid, informed written consent of the patient or parent/ guardian and an agreement to be randomized was obtained from the patient before registering the patient in this clinical study. Patient or parent/ guardian was informed about all the theoretical risks and benefits of the intervention under test. Risks and hazards of radiation during CBCT were also explained to the patient.
INTERVENTION AND DESIGN OF STUDY
The main intervention in this clinical study is placement of 2 different fixed functional appliances after initial levelling and alignment of dental arches. The study consists of 3 groups with equal allocation of subjects in each group-
G1- This group received Powerscope2 appliance bilaterally G2-This group received Forsus bilaterally (as per size suitable for the individual.
G3-The control group wiil be selected from patients with same diagnosis who just began orthodontic treatment, and matches well with the post treatment patients of Powerscope2 and Forsus through age, sex and development condition.
Selection of subjects in intervention groups (patients meeting selection criteria)
Treatment with 0.022 MBT preadjusted edgewise appliance
Maxillary and mandibular arches will be stabilized with the help of 0.019" × 0.025" stainless steel wire, reverse torque will be introduced in the lower anterior segment and wires will be cinched back distal to 2ndmolars.
Patient were randomly allocated into 2 groups.
1 PowerScope2 (G1) 2. Forsus (G2)
Pretreatment diagnostic records including lateral cephalogram were taken. CBCT was taken before insertion and after removal of the fixed functional appliance.
Insertion of fixed functional appliance as per the group allocated. Regular follow up till the completion of functional phase of treatment will be done. Patients will undergo functional appliance phase till Class I molar relationship is achieved.
RANDOMISATION \& ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT The subjects were randomly allocated by a sealed opaque envelope method. The study subjects were blinded regarding intervention group. Allocated appliance was inserted on the patient.
DATA COLLECTION AND CBCT ANALYSIS
The investigator recorded the patients' name, address and contact number. CBCT will be recorded before placement of fixed functional appliance and immediately after its removal in order to evaluate changes caused by the functional appliances.
To check patient comfort, all patients were given a questionnaire to investigate the patient's experiences with PowerScope2 and Forsus. The questionnaire was designed in English and then verbally translated into the patients and parents native language at the installation appointment though all the patients and their parents could read and understand it in English.
Prefunctional and postfunctional profile photographs of the treatment groups (G1 and G2) patients and those of control will be presented to 5 orthodontists, 5 patients, 5 parents and 5 laypersons.The raters will assess changes in facial appearance on a visual analog scale.
CBCT Data Acquisition The pre-treatment and post-treatment CBCT scans of two intervention groups (G1 \& G2) and the CBCT of control group (G3) will be collected and analysed.
During CBCT scan, patients will be instructed to maintain an upright posture and natural head position. The CBCT scans will be performed at rest position of the tongue (tongue in contact with anterior palate without touching the anterior teeth) and maximum intercuspation. All of the scans will be performed by the same researcher.
DATA COLLECTION \& INTERPRETATION Data will be collected, properly arranged and a CONSORT flow chart will be made to derive final sample size and calculate number of exclusions.
Statistical analysis:-The data recorded will be processed by standard statistical analysis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| PowerScope2 group (G1) | Active comparator | Device: Class II correction using PowerScope2Class II correction using PowerScope2 |
| Forsus group (G2) | Active comparator | Device: Class II correction using ForsusClass II correction using Forsus |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 12 to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (15 listed)
- Patients in active growth period
- Skeletal Class II malocclusion
- Normal or mildly prognathic maxilla
- Retrognathic mandible.
- Increased overjet, not less than 5 mm.
Key exclusion criteria (0 listed)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Class II correction using PowerScope2 | Device | PowerScope2 group (G1) |
| Class II correction using Forsus | Device | Forsus group (G2) |
Primary outcome
mandibular length
Time frame: 20 months
changes in mandibular length after intervention
oropharyngeal volume
Time frame: 20 months
changes in oropharyngeal volumes after intervention
condylar changes
Time frame: 20 months
condylar changes after intervention
patient experiences
Time frame: 20 months
patient experiences with Forsus and PowerScope
pancherz analysis
Time frame: 20 months
pancherz analysis after intervention
soft tissue changes
Time frame: 20 months
soft tissue changes after intervention
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Apr 2019.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes
Related trials for Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
Enrolling by invitation
Discision as Acceleration Method in Canine Retraction in Orthodontics With Aligner and Fixed Appliances in Young Adults a Split Mouth Study
Bimaxillary Protrusion, Class II Div 1 Malocclusion
Recruiting
Twin-Block and LIPUS for TMJ Outcomes in Skeletal Class II Patients
CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION
Recruiting
LLLLT vs Piezocision in Accelerating Orthodontic Canine Retraction
Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Division 1, Bimaxillary Protrusion
Recruiting
EVALUATION OF TREATMENT CHANGES IN CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION DURING EN MASSE RETRACTION OF UPPER ANTERIOR TEETH USING MINI IMPLANTS PLACED AT INFRAZYGOMATIC CREST AND INTERRADICULAR SITES A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL.
CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Early Interceptive Orthodontic Appliances (Traditional and Novel) and Later Fixed Appliance Treatment in Class II Malocclusion.
Class II Malocclusion, Class II Malocclusion, Division 1
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Sonal Chowdhary principal investigator
Post Graduate Institute of Dental Sciences
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Class II correction using PowerScope2 and Class II correction using Forsus in people with Class II Division 1 Malocclusion, run by Postgraduate Institute of Dental Sciences Rohtak at 1 site in India.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 15 inclusion and 0 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Apr 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in India. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
mandibular length (time frame: 20 months). The study lists 6 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Apr 2019.