Background: Class II malocclusion is characterized by an incorrect relationship of maxillary and mandibular dental arches resulting from either skeletal or dental abnormalities, or even a combination of these conditions. Functional fixed appliances constitute a third alternative to treat Class II malocclusions without extraction or surgery. Aim of the study: To compare study of two fixed functional appliance in class II malocclusion patients. Materials and methods: The present study was conducted in the Department of Orthodontics of the Dental institution. The ethical clearance for the study was approved from the ethical committee of the hospital. All patients signed an informed consent to participate in the study. The study included 40 patients selected from the department OPD list. The patients were grouped based on the treatment, Group 1 and Group 2. Group 1 patients were treated with Jasper Jumper and Group 2 patients with Herbst appliance. Two lateral head films were obtained from each patient in the following stages of orthodontic treatment: pre-treatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2), after use of the orthopedic appliance, leveling, alignment and finishing procedures. Results: The mean age of patients in group 1 was 13.06 years and in group 2 was 12.27 years. The mean follow up period was 2.09 years for group 1 and 2.83 years for group 2. The number of male patients in group 1 was 9 and in group 2 was 8. The number of female patients in group 1 was 11 and in group 2 was 12. We observed that significant improvement was seen among maxillary component, mandibular component, saggital jaw relationship, growth pattern, maxillary dentoalveolar component, mandibular dentoalveolar component and dental relationships in both the groups. Conclusion: Within the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that the effects of the different fixed functional appliances were similar in correcting Class II malocclusion.
Keywords: Functional appliances, class II malocclusion, fixed appliances, orthodontic treatment.