This paper presents the methods of transfer from functional to fixed appliances. The aim of transition should be maintenance of Class II correction in a time-efficient manner without compromising long-term patient co-operation.
ChadwickSM, BanksP, WrightJLThe use of myofunctional appliances in the UK: a survey of British orthodontists. Dent Update1998; 25: 302–8.
4.
AelbersCM, DermautLROrthopedics in orthodontics: part I, fiction or reality–a review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1996; 110: 513–19.
5.
O'BrienK, WrightJ, ConboyF, Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: dental and skeletal effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2003; 124: 234–43.
6.
TullochJF, PhilipsC, KochG, ProffitWRThe effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in Class II malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1997; 111: 391–400.
7.
WheelerTT, McGorraySP, DolceC, TaylorMG, KingGJEffectiveness of early treatment of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2002; 121: 9–17.
8.
GhafariJ, ShoferFS, Jacobsson-HuntU, MarkowitzDL, LasterLLHeadgear versus function regulator in the early treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1998; 113: 51–61.
9.
MillsCM, McCulloughKJPosttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the twin block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2000; 118: 24–33.
10.
CozzaP, BaccettiT, FranchiL, De ToffolL, McNamaraJAJr.Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2006; 129: 599e1–599.e12.
11.
McNamaraJAJr.Components of class II malocclusion in children 8–10 years of age. Angle Orthod1981; 51: 177–202.
12.
OzturkY, TankuterNClass II: a comparison of activator and activator headgear combination appliances. Eur J Orthod1994; 16: 149–57.
13.
CuretonSL, RegennitterFJ, YanceyJMClinical versus quantitative assessment of headgear compliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1993; 104: 277–84.
14.
BrandaoM, PinhoHS, UriasDClinical and quantitative assessment of headgear compliance: a pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2006; 129: 239–44.
15.
WiltshireWA, TsangSA modern rationale for orthopedics and orthodontic retention. Semin Orthod2006; 12: 60–66.
16.
McSherryPF, BradleyHClass II correction-reducing patient compliance: a review of the available techniques. J Orthod2000; 27: 219–25.
17.
ReadMJ, DeaconS, O'BrienK.A prospective cohort study of a clip-on fixed functional appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2004; 125: 444–49.
18.
ReadMJThe integration of functional and fixed appliance treatment. J Orthod2001: 28: 13–18.
19.
PancherzHTreatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod1979; 76: 423–42.
20.
BassNMThe Dynamax system: a new orthopaedic appliance and case report. J Orthod2006; 33: 78–89.
21.
WeilandFJ, IngervallB, BantleonHP, DroachtHInitial effects of treatment of Class II malocclusion with the Herren activator, activator-headgear combination, and Jasper Jumper. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1997; 112: 19–27.
22.
Coelho FilhoCM. Mandibular protraction appliances for Class II treatment. J Clin Orthod1995; 29: 319–36.
KirschenRH, O'HigginsEA, LeeRT. The Royal London Space Planning: an integration of space analysis and treatment planning: part I: assessing the space required to meet treatment objectives. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2000; 118: 448–55.
25.
LundDI, SandlerPJThe effects of Twin Blocks: a prospective controlled study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1998; 113: 104–10.
26.
PancherzH, MalmgrenO, HaggU, OmblusJ, HansenKClass II correction in Herbst and Bass therapy. Eur J Orthod1989; 11: 17–30.
