An interventional study of Canine and molar power arms and Conventional canine retraction in Malocclusion, Angle Class II and Tooth Movement Techniques, sponsored by Atlas University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Open to participants aged 14 Years to 20 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-09.
Sponsored by Atlas University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of a canine distalization force applied between power arms placed on the maxillary canine and first molar, in comparison with the classical method without power arms. Following maxillary first premolar extraction, canine distalization is commonly accompanied by undesirable effects such as distal tipping and distopalatal rotation of the canine and mesial movement (anchorage loss) of the first molar. By bringing the applied force closer to the teeth's centers of resistance through power arms, the study seeks to move the canine into the extraction space as close to parallel (bodily) movement as possible. The hypothesis is that applying force with Ni-Ti closed-coil springs between power arms placed on the molar and canine teeth reduces undesirable dental effects such as rotation, tipping and anchorage loss during distalization compared with the classical method. In a split-mouth design, 16 patients with maxillary first premolar extractions and moderate anchorage requirement receive power-arm mechanics on one randomly selected side (study side) and conventional mechanics on the other side (control side), with a 150 g force on both sides, over three months of canine distalization.
Design and setting: Prospective, randomized, controlled, split-mouth in vivo clinical study conducted as a specialty (residency) thesis at the Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayis University, Samsun, Turkey. Sixteen patients (11 female, 5 male; mean age at treatment start 16 years 1 month) with Angle Class II malocclusion requiring extraction of the maxillary right and left first premolars and fixed appliance treatment with moderate anchorage were included. The right and left maxillary quadrants of each patient form the study and control groups (16 sides per group).
Randomization: At bracket bonding, the side receiving the molar tube with a power arm was selected at random using a computer program; the other side received a standard molar tube. The side with the power arm forms the study group and the side without it the control group.
Treatment: Brackets were bonded one week after extraction of the maxillary first premolars (37% orthophosphoric acid, Transbond XT primer and adhesive, 3M) using 0.022 x 0.028-inch vertical-slot metal brackets (Mini Master V-Slot, American Orthodontics). Leveling and alignment were completed with 0.014-, 0.016- and 0.019 x 0.025-inch copper Ni-Ti archwires at 4-week intervals; no laceback ligatures were used. A 0.019 x 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was then placed and left for one month without active force to allow bracket torque expression, after which baseline (T0) impressions and photographs were taken. On the study side, a U-shaped canine power arm was bent from 0.016 x 0.022-inch stainless steel wire with its gingival opening facing mesially, its height matched to the molar power arm. One end of a 9-mm Ni-Ti closed-coil spring (American Orthodontics) was attached to the molar power-arm hook and the other to the canine power-arm hook with a 0.010-inch long ligature wire, at the level at which a force gauge (Loyka ATG-500) read 150 g. On the control side, the spring was attached in the same way between the molar tube hook and the canine bracket hook, activated to 150 g.
Records and measurements: Patients were recalled every 4 weeks for three months. At each visit the maxillary archwire was removed and intraoral photographs and alginate impressions were taken at the start of distalization (T0) and at the 1st (T1), 2nd (T2) and 3rd (T3) months. Plaster casts were scanned with a 3D model scanner (3Shape) and the digital models were superimposed (T0-T1, T0-T2, T0-T3) in OrthoAnalyzer (3Shape) using the medial and lateral points of the third palatal ruga and the medial point of the second palatal ruga. Canine distalization (mm), canine rotation (degrees), canine tipping (degrees) and first molar anchorage loss (mm) were measured separately for each side relative to the occlusal plane and a sagittal plane through and parallel to the midpalatal suture. Impressions, casts, scanning and all measurements were performed by the same investigator. Method error was assessed by repeating 104 measurements after 2 weeks (Dahlberg formula).
Sample size: Based on data from Leethanakul et al., a power analysis in G*Power 3.1.9.7 (alpha = 0.05, power = 95%) indicated 6 subjects per group; considering possible attrition during active orthodontic treatment, 8 per group (16 individuals in total) were included.
This record was registered retrospectively after completion of the trial.
469 studies on the registry are indexed under Malocclusion; 91 are open to participants now.
This study's enrollment of 16 is below the median of 36 across 383 interventional studies indexed under Malocclusion.
Browse Malocclusion studies →Atlas University is the lead sponsor of 94 studies on the registry; 25 are open to participants now.
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:
Study side (power arms)
Device: Canine and molar power arms
Contralateral maxillary canine retracted on the same archwire with a 150 g Ni-Ti closed-coil spring activated between the molar tube hook and the canine bracket hook, without power arms.
Procedure: Conventional canine retraction
Molar tube with a power arm and a U-shaped canine power arm bent from 0.016 x 0.022-inch stainless steel wire (gingival opening facing mesially), adjusted to the molar power-arm height; a 9-mm Ni-Ti closed-coil spring is attached between the two power-arm hooks via a 0.010-inch long ligature wire and activated to 150 g measured with a force gauge.
9-mm Ni-Ti closed-coil spring delivering 150 g attached directly between the molar tube hook and the canine bracket hook.
Also known as: Sliding mechanics canine retraction
Canine distalization
Distal movement of the maxillary canine cusp tip (mm), measured on superimposed 3D digital models as the distance between successive cusp-tip projections on a reference line parallel to the midpalatal raphe. Reported per month and cumulatively.
Time frame: Baseline (T0), 1, 2 and 3 months of retraction; cumulative T0 to 3 months
First molar anchorage loss
Mesial movement of the maxillary first molar (mm), measured at the mesial contact point between the first molar and second premolar, projected on the same reference line on superimposed models.
Time frame: Baseline (T0), 1, 2 and 3 months; cumulative T0 to 3 months
Canine rotation
Distopalatal rotation of the maxillary canine (degrees): angle between a line through the canine cusp tip and palatal ridge and a line parallel to the midpalatal raphe.
Time frame: Baseline (T0), 1, 2 and 3 months; cumulative T0 to 3 months
Canine tipping
Mesiodistal crown tipping of the maxillary canine (degrees): angle between a line from the disto-incisal bracket corner to the canine cusp tip and the horizontal reference of the midsagittal plane.
Time frame: Baseline (T0), 1, 2 and 3 months; cumulative T0 to 3 months
Plan to share: No — Individual participant data are not deposited in a public repository; de-identified data are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
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 completed, 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.
Atlas University