Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions| Reviewers

Login 
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 881    
     


 
Table of Contents   
ERRATUM
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 235
Erratum: The effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations during canine retraction: A three-dimensional randomized clinical trial



Date of Web Publication20-Mar-2020

Correspondence Address:
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2231-0762.281092

Rights and Permissions



How to cite this article:
. Erratum: The effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations during canine retraction: A three-dimensional randomized clinical trial. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent 2020;10:235

How to cite this URL:
. Erratum: The effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations during canine retraction: A three-dimensional randomized clinical trial. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent [serial online] 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 2];10:235. Available from: http://www.jispcd.org/text.asp?2020/10/2/235/281092


In the article titled “The effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations during canine retraction: A three-dimensional randomized clinical trial”, published on pages 637–645, Issue 6, Volume 9 of Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry,[1] the abstract is incorrectly written.

The corrected and complete version should read as follow:

Aims and objectives: Saving time by tooth movement acceleration is a new idea in orthodontic treatment. This study was conducted to evaluate micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) in accelerating orthodontic tooth movement. Materials and Methods: Eight patients of both genders were selected, age ranging between 15–40 years old, with Class II division 1 malocclusion. The samples were randomly categorized into 2 groups (MOPs side & control side). The first maxillary premolars were extracted as part of the treatment plan on both sides and then canine retraction was applied. MOPs side received 3 small perforations placed on the left or right side randomly distal to the maxillary canine using an automated mini-implant driver and the other side was the control side. The analysis was done by the assessment of CBCT, 3D shape cast measurements and measurement of pain levels. Results: The MOPS side showed no tooth movement acceleration compared to the control side and statistics were not significant for comparison between MOPs and control groups except after the 3rd month (p-value=0.002) which was significant because the p-value was <0.05. CBCT analysis of the maxillary canine demonstrated no statistically significant difference in root resorption and bone height before retraction and after 3 months. MOPs treatment showed normal pain during the first 2-7-28 days and did not produce extra discomfort. Conclusions: According to our clinical trial, MOPs cannot help in speeding up the canine retraction.



 
   References Top

1.
Alqadasi B, Aldhorae K, Halboub E, Mahgoub N, Alnasri A, Assiry A, et al. The effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations during canine retraction: A three-dimensional randomized clinical trial. J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent 2019;9:637– 45  Back to cited text no. 1
    




 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
 
  Search
 
  
    Similar in PUBMED
    Article in PDF (64 KB)
    Citation Manager
    Access Statistics
    Reader Comments
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed207    
    Printed11    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded20    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal