An interventional study of Orthodontic Molar Protraction and PAOO and Orthodontic Molar Protraction in Malocclusion, sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 99 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-15.
Sponsored by University of Alabama at Birmingham · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
This study will compare orthodontic molar protraction with and without adjunctive periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontic (PAOO) surgery prior to orthodontic tooth movement.
To the investigators' knowledge, this type of molar retraction in adult patients has not been compared with and without the adjunctive use of PAOO for differences in clinical linear tooth movement and patient centered outcomes (discomfort, change in daily activities, satisfaction with esthetic outcomes) in a controlled study.
Research data and daily clinical observations reveal that molar protraction (forward movement) in adult patients may be prolonged and ideal outcomes may not be achieved with traditional orthodontic tooth movement. One method for enhancing orthodontic tooth movement is the use of surgical access of the local site to initiate a regional tissue reaction to induce trauma, which leads to a limited inflammatory healing process. This process is also known as regional acceleratory phenomenon (RAP), which allows for more rapid bone turnover and has been shown in other protocols to enhance orthodontic tooth movement. While PAOO has been shown to rapidly increase tooth movement, to our knowledge, localized use of PAOO in combination with molar protraction in adults has not been evaluated in a prospective trial for differences in clinical outcomes (tooth movement time, adverse orthodontic outcomes, periodontal and soft tissue defects) and patient-centered outcomes (pain, swelling, change in daily activities, patient assessment of surgical benefit, and patient-assessed esthetics) in a controlled study.
323 studies on the registry are indexed under Malocclusion; 85 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 40 is close to the median of 37 across 242 interventional studies indexed under Malocclusion.
Browse Malocclusion studies →University of Alabama at Birmingham is the lead sponsor of 1,421 studies on the registry; 277 are open to participants now.
Of its 164 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 130 (79%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Informed consent
Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.
You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Molar protraction using orthodontic tooth movement alone
Procedure: Orthodontic Molar Protraction
Molar protraction using orthodontic tooth movement and adjunctive Periodontally Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontics (PAOO)
Procedure: Orthodontic Molar Protraction and PAOO
Molar Protraction with Orthodontic Tooth Movement and Adjunctive Periodontally Accelerated Osteogenic Orthodontics (PAOO) Surgery was performed on all study sites in this arm in coordination with standard orthodontic molar protraction using traditional bands/brackets and orthodontic wires.
Standard orthodontic molar protraction using traditional bands/brackets and orthodontic wires.
Linear millimeters of molar tooth movement
Compare the clinical linear molar tooth movement over a 3 month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontic therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Tooth angulation as measured radiographically
Compare the radiographic mesial inclination of the molar to be protracted over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Periodontal probing depth
Compare the periodontal probing depth (PD) at six sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Periodontal clinical attachment level
Compare the clinical attachment level (CAL) at six sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Periodontal width of keratinized tissue
Compare the width of keratinized tissue (KT) at up to two sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Periodontal width of attached tissue
Compare the width of attached tissue at up to two sites per tooth at treated teeth over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO).
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Practitioner-assessed treatment outcomes
Compare the practitioner-assessed esthetic outcomes using the pink esthetic score (PES) (Belser et al., 2009) over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO). This score is a grid which assesses mesial and distal papilla fill on a 0-2 scale, curvature of facial gingiva on a 0-2 scale, level of facial gingiva on a 0-2 scale, and root convexity/soft tissue color and contour on a 0-2 scale for an overall maximum assessment of 10 for esthetics. A 10 score would be considered ideal esthetics and a 0 would be considered least desirable. Each individual component of the PES is summed to provide the ultimate PES score.
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Patient-assessed esthetic outcomes
Compare the patient-assessed satisfaction with esthetic outcomes over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of their esthetic outcome.
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Patient centered post-operative discomfort assessment
Compare treatment discomfort over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the post-operative discomfort.
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Patient centered global treatment satisfaction
Compare treatment overall treatment satisfaction over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the patient's global assessment of treatment outcomes.
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
Patient centered alteration of daily activities assessment
Compare assessment of post-treatment change in daily activities over a 3-month time frame (Baseline to 3 months) between two groups receiving orthodontics therapy alone or in combination with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) using a visual analog scale from 0-100mm to determine the patients' assessment of the post-operative changes to daily activities.
Time frame: From baseline to 3months
No study locations are listed for this record.
Start is estimated for Jan 2027; primary completion for Dec 2028, 23 months later.
Of 153 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Malocclusion, half reached primary completion within 18 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 30. This study's planned 23 months is above that.
Counting every sponsor, half of 163 studies reached it within 19 months; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 32.
Since we started tracking on Sep 25, 2026, the dates moved once, on Oct 15, 2026: start Oct 2026 → Jan 2027, primary completion Dec 2027 → Dec 2028 and completion Dec 2028 → Dec 2029.
Earlier changes are on the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
University of Alabama at Birmingham →