Is Herbst-Multibracket Appliance Treatment More Efficient in Adolescents than in Adults?

Objective: To determine whether Herbst treatment is more efficient in adolescent than in adult Class II division 1 subjects. Materials and Methods: All Class II division 1 patients with a full secondary dentition who had been treated at the orthodontic department of the University of Giessen with a Herbst appliance between 1990 and 2000 were considered. The complete records of 77 patients were available. According to their skeletal maturity, as assessed on hand-wrist radiographs, the subjects were divided into an adolescent group (MP3-F to MP3-H; n = 49; mean age 13.5 years) and an adult group (R-IJ to R-J; n = 28; mean age 20.7 years). Pretreatment and posttreatment dental casts were evaluated using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index. The reductions in PAR scores of the two groups were compared. Results: Before treatment, both groups had a severe Class II division 1 malocclusion. The average PAR score of the adolescent patients was slightly lower (27.8) than that of the adult patients (28.8). After treatment, good results were reached for both groups, and the average PAR scores of the two groups were comparable (adolescents: 4.5; adults: 4.8). The average reductions in PAR score were 82.7% (23.3 points) for the adolescent group and 82.9% (24.0 points) for the adults, indicating great improvement in both groups. Conclusions: Because good treatment results were achieved, with substantial improvement of the pretreatment situation in both groups, Herbst treatment can be considered equally efficient in adolescent and in adult Class II division 1 subjects. (Angle Orthod. 2009;79-.173-177.)