Abstract Objective Maxillary molar distalization with intraoral distalizer appliances is a non-extraction orthodontic treatment used to correct molar relationship in patients with Class II malocclusion presenting maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and minor skeletal discrepancies. This study compares the changes caused by three distalizers with different force systems. Methodology 71 patients, divided into three groups, were included. The Jones jig group (JJG, n=30; 16 male, 14 female, 13.17 years mean age) was treated with the Jones jig for 0.8 years. The Distal jet group (DJG, n=25; 8 male, 17 female, 12.57 years mean age) was treated with the Distal jet for 1.06 years. The First Class group (FCG, n=16; 6 male, 10 female, 12.84 years mean age) was treated with the First Class for 0.69 years. Intergroup treatment changes were compared using one-way ANOVA, followed by post-hoc Tukey’s tests. Results Intergroup comparisons showed significantly greater maxillary incisor protrusion in DJG than in FCG (2.56±2.24 mm vs. 0.74±1.39mm, p=0.015). The maxillary first premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (14.65±6.31º, 8.43±3.99º, 0.97±3.16º; p<0.001). They also showed greater mesialization in JJG than FCG (3.76±1.46 mm vs. 2.27±1.47 mm, p=0.010), and greater extrusion in DJG compared to JJG (0.90±0.77 mm vs 0.11±0.60 mm, p=0.004). The maxillary second premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation and mesialization in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (12.77±5.78º, 3.20±3.94º, -2.12±3.71º and 3.87±1.34 mm, 2.25±1.40 mm, 1.24±1.26 mm, respectively; p<0.001). DJG showed smaller distal angulation of maxillary first molars (-2.14±5.09º vs. -7.73±4.28º and -6.05±3.76º, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p<0.001) and greater maxillary second molars extrusion (1.17±1.41 mm vs -0.02±1.16 mm and 0.16±1.40 mm, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p=0.003). Overjet change was significantly larger in DJG compared to FCG (1.79±1.67 mm vs 0.68±0.84; p=0.046). Treatment time was smaller in FCG (0.69±0.22 years vs 0.81±0.33 years and 1.06±0.42 years, comparing it with the JJG and DJG, respectively; p=0.005). Conclusion The three appliances corrected the Class II molar relationship by dentoalveolar changes. The Distal jet produced smaller molar distal angulation than the Jones jig and First Class. The First Class appliance showed less anchorage loss, greater percentage of distalization and shorter treatment time than the Jones jig and Distal jet.

OBJETIVO: a proposta desse estudo foi avaliar cefalometricamente os efeitos esqueléticos e dentoalveolares do tratamento da má oclusão de Classe II com o distalizador Jones jig, seguido do uso do aparelho fixo corretivo. MÉTODOS: a amostra constituiu de 25 pacientes com má oclusão de Classe II, tratados com o distalizador Jones Jig, seguido do uso de aparelho fixo corretivo, com média de idade inicial de 12,90 anos. O tempo médio de tratamento ortodôntico total foi de 3,89 anos. A fase de distalização durou 0,85 anos, e a fase de aparelho fixo pós-distalização foi de 3,04 anos. Foram utilizadas as telerradiografias nos tempos inicial (T1), pós-distalização (T2) e final do aparelho fixo (T3). Para comparação intragrupo nos três tempos avaliados, foram utilizados os testes ANOVA dependente e de Tukey. RESULTADOS: os resultados demonstraram que o Jones Jig não interferiu no componente maxilar e mandibular, e não promoveu alterações na relação maxilomandibular. O Jones Jig promoveu distalização dos primeiros molares, com perda de ancoragem, mesialização e extrusão significativa dos primeiros e segundos pré-molares, e aumento significativo da altura facial anteroinferior ao final do tratamento. A maioria dos efeitos adversos ocorridos na fase de distalização intrabucal são posteriormente corrigidos durante a mecânica corretiva. Verificou-se vestibularização e protrusão dos incisivos inferiores. Ao final do tratamento, foi observada a correção dos trespasses horizontal e vertical. CONCLUSÕES: o distalizador Jones Jig promoveu a distalização dos primeiros molares, com perda de ancoragem, representada pela mesialização e extrusão significativa dos primeiros e segundos pré-molares, e aumento significativo da altura facial anteroinferior.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to cephalometrically assess the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Class II malocclusion treatment performed with the Jones Jig appliance followed by fixed appliances. METHODS: The sample comprised 25 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with the Jones Jig appliance followed by fixed appliances, at a mean initial age of 12.90 years old. The mean time of the entire orthodontic treatment was 3.89 years. The distalization phase lasted for 0.85 years, after which the fixed appliance was used for 3.04 years. Cephalograms were used at initial (T1), post-distalization (T2) and final phases of treatment (T3). For intragroup comparison of the three phases evaluated, dependent ANOVA and Tukey tests were used. RESULTS: Jones Jig appliance did not interfere in the maxillary and mandibular component and did not change maxillomandibular relationship. Jones Jig appliance promoted distalization of first molars with anchorage loss, mesialization and significant extrusion of first and second premolars, as well as a significant increase in anterior face height at the end of treatment. The majority of adverse effects that occur during intraoral distalization are subsequently corrected during corrective mechanics. Buccal inclination and protrusion of mandibular incisors were identified. By the end of treatment, correction of overjet and overbite was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Jones Jig appliance promoted distalization of first molars with anchorage loss represented by significant mesial movement and extrusion of first and second premolars, in addition to a significant increase in anterior face height.

O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar a concentração de flúor na água engarrafada comercializada, comparando-a aos valores impressos no rótulo da embalagem. Foram coletadas 229 amostras de água das 35 marcas disponíveis em diversos supermercados, mercearias e lanchonetes de grande circulação nas diferentes regiões do município de São Paulo, em 2006. A concentração de flúor foi determinada por análise em duplicata, utilizando o eletrodo íon-específico. A concentração de flúor variou entre 0,01 e 2,04 mg/l, com diferenças significantes entre os valores estipulados nos rótulos e os encontrados com a análise. Esses resultados reforçam a importância do controle dos níveis de flúor na água engarrafada por parte da vigilância sanitária.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the fluoride concentration in bottled water available on the market, in comparison with the values printed on the bottle label. Two hundred and twenty-nine water samples were collected from 35 brands available in several supermarkets, grocery stores and snack bars with high turnover in different regions of the municipality of São Paulo, Southeastern Brazil, in 2006. Fluoride concentrations were determined by duplicate analysis using an ion-specific electrode. The fluoride concentrations ranged from 0.01 to 2.04 mg/l, with significant differences between the values stipulated on labels and those found in the analyses. These results emphasize the importance of controls over fluoride levels in bottled water enforced by the sanitary surveillance agency.

O objetivo do estudo foi avaliar a concentração de flúor na água engarrafada comercializada, comparando-a aos valores impressos no rótulo da embalagem. Foram coletadas 229 amostras de água das 35 marcas disponíveis em diversos supermercados, mercearias e lanchonetes de grande circulação nas diferentes regiões do município de São Paulo, em 2006. A concentração de flúor foi determinada por análise em duplicata, utilizando o eletrodo íon-específico. A concentração de flúor variou entre 0,01 e 2,04 mg/l, com diferenças significantes entre os valores estipulados nos rótulos e os encontrados com a análise. Esses resultados reforçam a importância do controle dos níveis de flúor na água engarrafada por parte da vigilância sanitária.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the fluoride concentration in bottled water available on the market, in comparison with the values printed on the bottle label. Two hundred and twenty-nine water samples were collected from 35 brands available in several supermarkets, grocery stores and snack bars with high turnover in different regions of the municipality of São Paulo, Southeastern Brazil, in 2006. Fluoride concentrations were determined by duplicate analysis using an ion-specific electrode. The fluoride concentrations ranged from 0.01 to 2.04 mg/l, with significant differences between the values stipulated on labels and those found in the analyses. These results emphasize the importance of controls over fluoride levels in bottled water enforced by the sanitary surveillance agency.

OBJETIVO: Considerando a água como importante fonte de ingestão de flúor, o aumento da prevalência de fluorose dentária e do consumo de água mineral, o estudo realizado teve como objetivo avaliar o consumo de água mineral e sua concentração de flúor. MÉTODOS: A pesquisa foi realizada nos bairros do município de Bauru, SP. Foram visitadas mil residências que compunham uma amostra estratificada, obtida por conglomerados. Cada conglomerado correspondia a um quarteirão. Para efeito de sorteio os quarteirões foram numerados dentro das 17 regiões estabelecidas no plano diretor do município. Para coleta das amostras de água mineral foram usados frascos plásticos de 50 ml, previamente identificados. Na análise de flúor utilizou-se eletrodo íon sensível (Orion 9609) após tamponamento com TISAB II. Informações a respeito do consumo de água mineral foram obtidas com a aplicação de um questionário. RESULTADOS: Constatou-se que cerca de 29,7% da população do município consome água mineral. Nas 260 amostras analisadas, das 29 diferentes águas, a concentração de flúor variou de 0,045 a 1,515 mg/l. Em uma das águas, constava no rótulo o valor de 0,220 mg/l, mas na análise constatou-se 1,515 mg/l de flúor. Além disso, algumas águas não traziam especificado a concentração de flúor; e, na análise constataram-se valores variando entre 0,049 e 0,924 mg/l. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados mostraram uma grande variação na concentração de flúor e reforçam a importância do controle dessas águas por parte da vigilância sanitária.

OBJECTIVE: Considering that water is an importance source of fluoride intake, and that the consumption of mineral water and prevalence of dental fluorosis have been increasing, the aim of this study was to evaluate the consumption of mineral water and its fluoride concentration. METHODS: The study was performed in residential districts of the municipality of Bauru, State of São Paulo, by means of stratified sampling via clusters. Each cluster corresponded to one residential block. For randomization purposes, the residential blocks were numbered within the 17 districts established by the city plan. One thousand homes were thus visited. Mineral water samples were collected using previously labeled 50 ml plastic flasks. Fluoride analysis was done using an ion-sensitive electrode (Orion 9609), after buffering using TISAB II. Information on the consumption of mineral water was obtained by means of applying a questionnaire. RESULTS: Around 29.72% of the city's population was consuming mineral water. In the 260 samples analyzed from 29 different brands of water, the fluoride concentration ranged from 0.045 to 1.515 mg/l. For one brand, the label stated that the fluoride concentration was 0.220 mg/l, but analysis revealed a concentration of 1.515 mg/l. Moreover, some brands did not specify the fluoride concentration on the label and, for these, the analysis showed concentrations ranging from 0.049 to 0.924 mg/l. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated wide variation in fluoride concentrations and reinforce the importance of the control of such waters by the sanitary surveillance agency.

OBJETIVO: Considerando a água como importante fonte de ingestão de flúor, o aumento da prevalência de fluorose dentária e do consumo de água mineral, o estudo realizado teve como objetivo avaliar o consumo de água mineral e sua concentração de flúor. MÉTODOS: A pesquisa foi realizada nos bairros do município de Bauru, SP. Foram visitadas mil residências que compunham uma amostra estratificada, obtida por conglomerados. Cada conglomerado correspondia a um quarteirão. Para efeito de sorteio os quarteirões foram numerados dentro das 17 regiões estabelecidas no plano diretor do município. Para coleta das amostras de água mineral foram usados frascos plásticos de 50 ml, previamente identificados. Na análise de flúor utilizou-se eletrodo íon sensível (Orion 9609) após tamponamento com TISAB II. Informações a respeito do consumo de água mineral foram obtidas com a aplicação de um questionário. RESULTADOS: Constatou-se que cerca de 29,7% da população do município consome água mineral. Nas 260 amostras analisadas, das 29 diferentes águas, a concentração de flúor variou de 0,045 a 1,515 mg/l. Em uma das águas, constava no rótulo o valor de 0,220 mg/l, mas na análise constatou-se 1,515 mg/l de flúor. Além disso, algumas águas não traziam especificado a concentração de flúor; e, na análise constataram-se valores variando entre 0,049 e 0,924 mg/l. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados mostraram uma grande variação na concentração de flúor e reforçam a importância do controle dessas águas por parte da vigilância sanitária.

OBJECTIVE: Considering that water is an importance source of fluoride intake, and that the consumption of mineral water and prevalence of dental fluorosis have been increasing, the aim of this study was to evaluate the consumption of mineral water and its fluoride concentration. METHODS: The study was performed in residential districts of the municipality of Bauru, State of São Paulo, by means of stratified sampling via clusters. Each cluster corresponded to one residential block. For randomization purposes, the residential blocks were numbered within the 17 districts established by the city plan. One thousand homes were thus visited. Mineral water samples were collected using previously labeled 50 ml plastic flasks. Fluoride analysis was done using an ion-sensitive electrode (Orion 9609), after buffering using TISAB II. Information on the consumption of mineral water was obtained by means of applying a questionnaire. RESULTS: Around 29.72% of the city's population was consuming mineral water. In the 260 samples analyzed from 29 different brands of water, the fluoride concentration ranged from 0.045 to 1.515 mg/l. For one brand, the label stated that the fluoride concentration was 0.220 mg/l, but analysis revealed a concentration of 1.515 mg/l. Moreover, some brands did not specify the fluoride concentration on the label and, for these, the analysis showed concentrations ranging from 0.049 to 0.924 mg/l. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated wide variation in fluoride concentrations and reinforce the importance of the control of such waters by the sanitary surveillance agency.