These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

121 related items for PubMed ID: 9566158

  • 1. Twin Block appliance. Part II.
    Rondeau B.
    Funct Orthod; 1996; 13(2):4-10, 12-6. PubMed ID: 9566158
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Herbst Appliance fixed-functional appliance Class II skeletal malocclusion.
    Rondeau B.
    J Gen Orthod; 2001; 12(3):7-17. PubMed ID: 11692451
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 2. Soft tissue changes.
    Sharma AA, Lee RT.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):473-82. PubMed ID: 15821692
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Case report: Rick-a-Nator.
    Rondeau BH.
    J Gen Orthod; 1992 Sep; 3(3):24-6. PubMed ID: 1450284
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Class II malocclusion: why, when and how to treat this anomaly in mixed dentition with fixed functional appliances.
    Ritto AK.
    J Gen Orthod; 2001 Sep; 12(4):9-21. PubMed ID: 11822159
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. An evaluation of maxillary and mandibular rotational responses with the Clark twin block appliance.
    Lau EY, Sampson WJ, Townsend GC, Hughes T.
    Aust Orthod J; 2009 May; 25(1):48-58. PubMed ID: 19634464
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-block and mini-block appliances: Part 1. Hard tissue changes.
    Gill DS, Lee RT.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2005 Apr; 127(4):465-72; quiz 517. PubMed ID: 15821691
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Comparison of 2 modifications of the twin-block appliance in matched Class II samples.
    Parkin NA, McKeown HF, Sandler PJ.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2001 Jun; 119(6):572-7. PubMed ID: 11395699
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Treatment of developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion with Jumper Twin Block.
    Hammad SM, Bashir ES, El-Bialy AA.
    Int J Orthod Milwaukee; 2012 Jun; 23(2):51-6. PubMed ID: 22873025
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. [Treatment effects of magnetic Twin-block appliance for class II cases].
    Wu JY, Liu J, Li QS, Xu TM, Lin JX.
    Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi; 2007 Sep; 42(9):519-24. PubMed ID: 18070424
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 7.