The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Molar Mover and Drive Tube appliances. 20 patients with class II malocclusion were included to the study. 10 patients in Group 1 were treated with Molar Mover and 10 patients in Group 2 were treated with Drive Tube. Wilcoxon analysis was used to compare in-group differences and Mann Whitney U test was used for between-group differences. In both of the groups distal molar tipping and distopalatinal rotation were found. In Group 1, more distopalatinal rotation was observed and an increase in the intermolar distance was determined in this group. Extrusion, mesialization and mesial tipping of second premolars were found in Group 1, while extrusion, distalization and distal tipping of these teeth were found in Group 2. Anterior facial height increased in both of the groups due to the tipping of the first molars and extrusion of the second premolars. Protrusion of maxillary incisors and upper lip occurred depending on the anchorage loss and this protrusion caused reduction of nasolabial angle. Results of this study showed that Molar Mover and Drive Tube were both effective in molar distalization but undesirable side effects were more prominent in Molar Mover appliance.
Keywords: Intraoral molar distalization, Molar Mover, Drive Tube
