One of the important uses of extraoral appliances is to counterbalance force systems placed on the reactive, anchor teeth by intraoral appliances such as space closure springs. Extraoral appliances are often worn less than full time, whereas intraoral springs act full time. Anecdotal evidence indicates that sufficient part-time extraoral appliance wear with appropriate force level is sufficient to balance intraoral appliance activity while preserving anchorage. A rational explanation is presented to substantiate this clinical evidence through equating extraoral impulse (force x time and/or moment x time) to the impulse conveyed to the teeth by the intraoral appliance. By adjusting force and/or moment magnitude in combination with the correct time of application, the clinician can achieve appropriate energy levels for anchorage in three dimensions.
[1]
C. Burstone.
The segmented arch approach to space closure.
,
1982,
American journal of orthodontics.
[2]
T. Graber,et al.
Determinants controlling iatrogenic external root resorption and repair during and after palatal expansion.
,
1991,
The Angle orthodontist.
[3]
U. Teuscher.
An appraisal of growth and reaction to extraoral anchorage. Simulation of orthodontic-orthopedic results.
,
1986,
American journal of orthodontics.
[4]
C. R. Burstone.
Deep overbite correction by intrusion.
,
1977,
American journal of orthodontics.
[5]
Michael R. Marcotte,et al.
Biomechanics In Orthodontics
,
1990
.