Electromyographic features and efficacy of orofacial myofunctional treatment for skeletal anterior open bite in adolescents: an exploratory study

Table 2 Comparison of morphology characteristics between SAOB and normal subjects

	SAOB	Normal subjects	P
SNA	81.8 ± 3.58^a	82.4 ± 3.32	0.62
SNB	77.9 ± 4.59	79.5 ± 3.00	0.21
ANB	4.00 ± 2.21	2.85 ± 2.09	0.12
Mx1-SN	117 ± 8.21	114 ± 5.94	0.18
Md1-MP	94.5 ± 9.09	96.4 ± 5.73	0.47
Angle of axis of upper and lower central incisor	106 ± 12.0	114 ± 9.08	0.03
FMA	34.0 (27.9, 35.3)^b	24.3 (22.6, 26.6)	0.001
GoGn-SN	43.3 ± 5.85	34.4 ± 4.78	< 0.001
N-Me	120 (114, 125)	112 (111, 115)	0.006
ANS-Me	67.7 (66.2, 73.9)	61.5 (59.8, 64.8)	< 0.001
Go-S	72.8 ± 6.78	74.8 ± 4.88	0.31
Go-Ar	46.1 (45.0, 48.1)	45.8 (42.3, 49.7)	0.50
Overbite	− 1.80 (− 3.55, − 1.18)	0.80 (0.13, 2.33)	< 0.001
Overjet	4.45 (2.40, 6.50)	4.20 (3.15, 6.30)	0.91
U1-PP	28.6 ± 2.38	27.5 ± 2.48	0.19
L1-MP	40.8 ± 3.58	38.3 ± 1.83	0.01
U6-PP	20.3 (18.7, 22.4)	18.4 (17.4, 20.5)	0.02
L6-MP	27.6 ± 3.54	25.2 ± 2.14	0.02

Wilcoxon signed rank test was used for skew distribution data, t-test was used for normal distribution data, α = 0.05
^aMedian (25%, 75%)
^bMean ± standard deviation

ISSN: 1472-6831