NCT05597748

Brief Summary

This study will collect data to try to assess which one of the two management options works better. The first option involves the use of the bite corrector first and then braces, while the second option involves the temporary addition of small support bone screws with the bite corrector later and then braces. Currently, it is not clearly known if there are important differences between the proposed management options. Such approaches are conventionally used in orthodontic practices. The information collected in this study will be used to compare the differences in the nature of the facial, teeth, and bone changes after the treatment. Questions about the experience while using the devices will be asked.

Trial Health

30
At Risk

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Timeline
Completed

Started Aug 2023

Typical duration for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
withdrawn

Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.

Trial Relationships

Click on a node to explore related trials.

Study Timeline

Key milestones and dates

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

October 11, 2022

Completed
17 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

October 28, 2022

Completed
10 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

August 25, 2023

Completed
1.9 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

July 31, 2025

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

July 31, 2025

Completed
Last Updated

August 6, 2025

Status Verified

July 1, 2025

Enrollment Period

1.9 years

First QC Date

October 11, 2022

Last Update Submit

July 31, 2025

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (5)

  • Skeletal chin prominence

    Assess if the modified Herbst approach produces a more prominent chin protrusion than the one produced by the conventional Herbst. The distance in mm between the skeletal chin and a perpendicular virtual reference line will be calculated.

    1 year

  • Lower incisor inclination

    Assess if the modified Herbst approach produces less incisor inclination than the conventional Herbst approach. The angulation in degrees between the lower incisor and the mandibular plane will be calculated.

    1 year

  • Overall quality of life

    Assess if the overall quality of life is different than the one with the conventional Herbst approach. The CPQ11-14 ISF questionnaire will be used to assess oral health-related quality of life. The range of possible values es between 0 and 32. Lower values implied better perceived QoL.

    1 year

  • Oral health-related quality of life

    Assess if the oral health-related quality of life is different than the one with the conventional Herbst approach. The EuroQoL questionnaire will be used to assess oral health-related quality of life. The index calculates a value between 0 and 1. A higher value implies better QoL.

    1 year

  • Soft tissue Chin prominence

    Assess if the modified Herbst approach produces a more prominent chin protrusion. The distance in mm between the lower lip and a perpendicular virtual reference line will be calculated

    1 year

Secondary Outcomes (3)

  • Maxillary lip prominence

    1 year

  • Mandibular lip prominence

    1 year

  • Upper incisor inclination

    1 year

Study Arms (4)

Class II type A malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors indicated - No TADs

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

A hybrid Herbst appliance approach will be used (current available conventional treatment). The upper jaw component will be a maxillary expander secured on the first molar bands. The lower arch would have an uncemented lower acrylic full-coverage splint-type. In between Herbst-type pistons will be used. Upper brackets will be initially bonded and upper incisors proclined until normal inclination values are attained.

Device: Conventional Herbst Approach

Class II type B malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors not indicated - No TADs

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

A hybrid Herbst appliance approach will be used (current available conventional treatment). The upper jaw component will be a maxillary expander secured on the first molar bands. The lower arch would have an uncemented lower acrylic full-coverage splint-type. In between Herbst-type pistons will be used.

Device: Conventional Herbst Approach

Class II type A malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors indicated - TADs

EXPERIMENTAL

A modified hybrid Herbst appliance approach (same hybrid Herbst appliance approach but with the addition of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in both arches) will be used (alternative treatment). In the upper arch, the TADs would be inserted in the paramedical palatal area. In the lower arch, they would be inserted buccally between the roots of the lower second premolar and the first permanent molar. Elastomeric chains will be used to link these TADs to the first molars in the upper arch and to a buccal bottom on the lower canines. Upper brackets will be initially bonded and upper incisors proclined until normal inclination values are attained.

Device: Modified Herbst Approach

Class II type B malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors not indicated - TADs

EXPERIMENTAL

CA modified hybrid Herbst appliance approach (same hybrid Herbst appliance approach but with the addition of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in both arches) will be used (alternative treatment). In the upper arch, the TADs would be inserted in the paramedical palatal area. In the lower arch, they would be inserted buccally between the roots of the lower second premolar and the first permanent molar. Elastomeric chains will be used to link these TADs to the first molars in the upper arch and to a buccal bottom on the lower canines.

Device: Modified Herbst Approach

Interventions

A modified hybrid Herbst appliance approach (same hybrid Herbst appliance approach but with the addition of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in both arches) will be used (alternative treatment). In the upper arch, the TADs would be inserted in the paramedical palatal area. In the lower arch, they would be inserted buccally between the roots of the lower second premolar and the first permanent molar. Elastomeric chains will be used to link these TADs to the first molars in the upper arch and to a buccal bottom on the lower canines. Upper brackets will be initially bonded and upper incisors proclined until normal inclination values are attained.

Class II type A malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors indicated - TADsClass II type B malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors not indicated - TADs

A hybrid Herbst appliance approach will be used (current available conventional treatment). The upper jaw component will be a maxillary expander secured on the first molar bands. The lower arch would have an uncemented lower acrylic full-coverage splint-type. In between Herbst-type pistons will be used.

Class II type A malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors indicated - No TADsClass II type B malocclusion - proclination of upper incisors not indicated - No TADs

Eligibility Criteria

Age12 Years - 15 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsChild (0-17)

You may qualify if:

  • Class II skeletal malocclusion based on PgOLp more than 85 mm and A-OLp more than 75 mm.
  • Perceived potential improvement of facial convexity.
  • At least end-to-end bilateral molar relationship.
  • Early permanent dentition.
  • No congenitally missing teeth.

You may not qualify if:

  • Class II skeletal malocclusion based on PgOLp less than 85 mm and A-OLp less than 75 mm.
  • Only reasonable management option is surgery.
  • Less than an end-to-end bilateral molar relationship.
  • Mixed dentition dentition.
  • Congenitally missing teeth.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

University of Alberta

Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2C8, Canada

Location

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Overbite

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Malocclusion, Angle Class IIMalocclusionTooth DiseasesStomatognathic Diseases

Study Officials

  • Carlos Flores Mir, DSc

    University of Alberta

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
0

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
SINGLE
Who Masked
OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
Masking Details
The patient and care provider can't be masked as it is obvious what appliance modification is being used.
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Model Details: Four parallel arms all under treatment
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

October 11, 2022

First Posted

October 28, 2022

Study Start

August 25, 2023

Primary Completion

July 31, 2025

Study Completion

July 31, 2025

Last Updated

August 6, 2025

Record last verified: 2025-07

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Only the participant's unique ID is stored as personal identifying information. To be able to link this ID to specific participant identifiable information access to our password-protected health database would be needed.

Locations