CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT06432699MOPSUpdated Jan 27, 2025

Rate of Canine Retraction and Pain Perception Following Micro-osteoperforation- a Split Mouth Clinical Study

An interventional study of micro osteoperforation in Pain and Rate of Canine Retraction, sponsored by Foundation University Islamabad. Completed at 1 site in Pakistan. Open to participants aged 14 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-01-27.

Sponsored by Foundation University Islamabad · Not applicable, Interventional, and Supportive care

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
14 Years to 40 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

DEFINITION: A short description of clinical study , including a brief statement of clinical study's hypothesis, written in language intended for the lay public Limit: 5000 CHARACTERS

Read the detailed description

Definition: Extended description of the protocol ,including more technical information(as compared to the brief Summary), if desired. Do not include the entire protocol; do not duplicate information recorded in other data elements, such as eligibility criteria or outcome measures.

Limit:32,000 characters. For Patient Registries: Also describe the applicable registry procedures and other quality factors (for examples, third party certification, on site audit). In particular , summarize any procedures implemented as part of the patient registry, including , but not limited to the following:

  • Quality assurance plan that addresses data validation and registry procedures, including and plans for site monitoring and auditing
  • Data checks to compare data entered into the registry against predefined rules for range or consistency with other data fields in the registry.
  • Source data verification to assess the accuracy, completeness, or representativeness of registry data by comparing the data to external data sources( for example, medical records, paper or electronic case reports forms, or interactive voice response systems)
  • Data Dictionary that contains detailed descriptions of each variable used by the registry, including, including the source of the variable, coding information if used (for example World Health Organization Drug Dictionary, MedDRA), and normal ranges if relevant.
  • STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE TO ADDRESS REGISTRY REGISTRY OPERATIONS AND ANALYSISACTIVITIES, SUCH AS PATIENT RECRUITMENT DATA COLLECTION,DATA MANAGEMENT., DATA ANALYSIS, reporting for adverse events, and change management.
  • Sample Size Assessment to specify the number of participants or participate years necessary to demonstrate an effect.
  • Plan for missing data to address situations where variable are reported a missing , unavailable non-reported, interpretable, or considered missing because of data inconsistency or out-of-range results.
  • Statistical analysis plan describing the analytical principles and statistical techniques to be employed in order to address the primary and secondary objectives , as specified in the study protocol or plan
02

Conditions studied

  • Pain
  • Rate of Canine Retraction

Keywords

  • MOP
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Foundation University Islamabad is the lead sponsor of 238 studies on the registry; 128 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
14 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

    1. Age range around 15-40 years. 2. Patients which have class I malocclusion or class II Div I malocclusion and include first premolar extraction as part of treatment plan..
  1. No orthodontic treatment previously 4. Radiographic evidence showing no bone loss 5. History showing no periodontal disease. 6. History showing no systemic disease. 7. Probing depth less than 4 mm across the entire dentition 8. No active carious lesion or any sign of gingivitus

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Presence of any craniofacial abnormality.
  2. Any history of bleeding disorders.
  3. Poor oral hygiene.
  4. Use of bisphosphonates, analgesics, anti-inflammatory drugs, corticosteroids for more than three months prior to treatment or during treatment.
  5. Active diseases such as metabolic bone disease.
  6. Malocclusions requiring surgical intervention.
  7. Smoker

    -

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Supportive care
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • No intervention
    Control

    Participants in this arm will receive no MOP treatment

  • Experimental
    Experimental

    participants in this arm will receive MOPS intervention

    Other: micro osteoperforation

Interventions

  • Othermicro osteoperforation

    one side used for mops while other side will be control in same patient

    Also known as: Placebo/Controlled

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. pain will be measured after intervention of visual analogue scale

    patient after undergoing micro-osteoperforation will be aske to measure pain and check rate of canine retraction

    Time frame: three months since the MOPS

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Foundation University Islamabad
    Islamabad, Punjab 04403, Pakistan
08

References and documents

Publications

  • 1. Kundi, I., Alam, M. K., & Shaheed, S. (2020). Micro-osteo perforation effects as an intervention on canine retraction. The Saudi dental journal, 32(1), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.05.009 2. Husain S, Sundari S. Comparison of the effectiveness of piezocision-aided canine retraction augmented with micro-osteoperforation: a randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod. 2023 Oct 16. doi: 10.2319/052323-370.1. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 37839802. 12 3. Aboalnaga AA, Aboalnaga AA, Salah Fayed MM, El-Ashmawi NA, Soliman SA. Effect of micro-osteoperforation on the rate of canine retraction: a split- mouth randomized controlled trial. Prog Orthod. 2019 Jun;20(1) 21. doi:10.1186/s40510-019-0274-0. PMID: 31155698; PMCID: PMC6545296. 4. Bolat Gümüş, E., Kınsız, E. Effects of miniscrew-facilitated micro- osteoperforations on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement. J Orofac Orthop 84 (Suppl 2), 104-110 (2023). 5. Martina K., Kumar P., Misra V., Attri S., Yadav A., Sam R., Kumar R.. To evaluate the rate of canine retraction and pain perception following micro- osteoperforation - a split-mouth clinical study. Australasian Orthodontic Journal. 2022;38(2): 388-395
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jan 27, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06432699
Lead sponsor
Foundation University Islamabad
Responsible party
Shoaib Rahim (ZAINAB BUTT, Foundation University Islamabad) — Principal investigator
First posted
May 29, 2024
Start date
May 1, 2024
Primary completion
Jul 30, 2024
Completion
Dec 30, 2024
Last update
Jan 27, 2025

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jun 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions 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.

Start the discussion