Anterior open-bite treatment with bonded vs conventional lingual spurs: A comparative study

• Treatment effects and patient acceptance of 2 types of lingual spurs were compared.
• Both appliances resulted in similar overbite increases.
• After 1 week or less of treatment, 92.5% of the children adjusted to the spurs.

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to compare the isolated effects of bonded and conventional spurs on the craniofacial and dentoalveolar complexes of patients in the mixed dentition with anterior open bite.MethodsThe sample included 68 subjects with anterior open bite and Class I malocclusion. Group 1 comprised 20 patients treated with bonded lingual spurs with a mean initial age of 9.31 years (SD, 1.17). Group 2 consisted of 21 patients treated with conventional lingual spurs with a mean initial age of 9.22 years (SD, 1.62). The control group (group 3) consisted of 27 untreated subjects. One-way analysis of variance tests followed by Tukey tests were used for intergroup cephalometric comparisons. After 1 month of treatment, patient acceptance of the spurs was evaluated with a questionnaire.ResultsThere were significantly greater overbite increases in the experimental groups than in the control group. The group with bonded lingual spurs showed significantly better acceptance than did the group with conventional lingual spurs during chewing and eating.ConclusionsThe 2 appliances resulted in similar overbite increases during early open-bite treatment. After a week or less of treatment, 92.5% of the children had adjusted to the spurs.