Comparison of the Pendulum appliance and the Jones Jig: A prospective comparative study

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare two molar distalization devices, the Pendulum appliance (PA) and the Jones Jig (JJ) in dental Class II patients. Materials and Methods: Pretreatment and postdistalization lateral cephalograms and study models of 20 subjects (6 males, 14 females) Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. PA and JJ group both consisted of 10 patients each with a mean pretreatment age of 12 years 1 month for females and 12 years 5 months for males. The PA and the JJ appliance were activated once in a month until Class II molar relationship was corrected to a super Class I molar relationship in both groups. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of Paired t-test. Results: Maxillary first molar distalized an average of 3.85 mm in the PA and 2.75 mm in the JJ between T1 and T2; rate of molar distalization was 1.59 mm/month for PA, and the JJ appliance averaged 0.88 mm/month, distal molar tipping was greater in PA (6.2°) than in the JJ (3.9°). Average mesial movement of the premolars was 2.2 mm with PA and JJ both. JJ showed a greater rotation of first molars after distalization as compared to PA. The increase in vertical facial height was also greater for JJ as compared to PA. Conclusions: Both the appliances were effective in molar distalization with PA requiring less distalization time (16 days less than JJ). Some adverse effects were noted with both which one should strive to control.

Key words:

Distalization - jones jig - pendulum appliance

• REFERENCES

• 1 Celikoglu M, Unal T, Bayram M, Candirli C. Treatment of a skeletal class II malocclusion using fixed functional appliance with miniplate anchorage. Eur J Dent 2014; 8: 276-80
• 2 Jones RD, White JM. Rapid Class II molar correction with an open-coil jig. J Clin Orthod 1992; 26: 661-4
• 3 Hilgers JJ. The pendulum appliance for Class II non-compliance therapy. J Clin Orthod 1992; 26: 706-14
• 4 Ghosh J, Nanda RS. Evaluation of an intraoral maxillary molar distalization technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996; 110: 639-46
• 5 Kinzinger GS, Fritz UB, Sander FG, Diedrich PR. Efficiency of a pendulum appliance for molar distalization related to second and third molar eruption stage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 125: 8-23
• 6 Runge ME, Martin JT, Bukai F. Analysis of rapid maxillary molar distal movement without patient cooperation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115: 153-7
• 7 Benedicto Ede N, Kairalla SA, Oliveira GM, Junior LR, Rosário HD, Paranhos LR. Determination of vertical characteristics with different cephalometric measurements. Eur J Dent 2016; 10: 116-20
• 8 Byloff FK, Darendeliler MA. Distal molar movement using the pendulum appliance. Part 1: Clinical and radiological evaluation. Angle Orthod 1997; 67: 249-60
• 9 Scuzzo G, Pisani F, Takemoto K. Maxillary molar distalization with a modified pendulum appliance. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33: 645-50
• 10 Joseph AA, Butchart CJ. An evaluation of the pendulum distalizing appliance. Semin Orthod 2000; 6: 129-35
• 11 Brickman CD, Sinha PK, Nanda RS. Evaluation of the Jones jig appliance for distal molar movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118: 526-34
• 12 Patel MP, Henriques JF, de Almeida RR, Pinzan A, Janson G, de Freitas MR. Comparative cephalometric study of class II malocclusion treatment with Pendulum and Jones jig appliances followed by fixed corrective orthodontics. Dental Press J Orthod 2013; 18: 58-64
• 13 Schütze SF, Gedrange T, Zellmann MR, Harzer W. Effects of unilateral molar distalization with a modified pendulum appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 131: 600-8