## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group A (n = 38)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group B (n = 36)**} \\ \hline
**Baseline Data** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Difference** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} _p Value_ \\ _(t Test)_ \\ \end{tabular} & **Mean** & **SD** & **Difference** &
\begin{tabular}{c} _p Value_ \\ _(t Test)_ \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Maxilla & & & & & & & & \\ \hline Interpolar distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 52.4 & 3.3 & \(-7.3\) & 0.000 \({}^{*}\) & 52.3 & 2.8 & \(-7.6\) & 0.000 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Intercanine distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 32.7 & 2.8 & \(-3.1\) & 0.000 \({}^{*}\) & 34.4 & 2.8 & \(-5.9\) & 0.000 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline Mandible & & & & & & & \\ \hline Interpolar distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 45.7 & 2.7 & \(-0.4\) & 0.409 & 45.9 & 2.9 & \(-0.6\) & 0.175 \\ \hline Intercanine distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 25.9 & 2.2 & \(0\) & 0.994 & 27 & 2.2 & \(-1.1\) & 0.028 \(\ddagger\) \\ \hline Overjet & 2.9 & 2.2 & \(-0.6\) & 0.011 \(\ddagger\) & 2.6 & 1.6 & \(-0.2\) & 0.47 \\ \hline Overbite & 2.4 & 1.6 & \(-0.5\) & 0.05 & 2.1 & 1.6 & \(-0.6\) & 0.010 \(\ddagger\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)\(p\) < 0.01; \(\ddagger\) _p < 0.05_.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Dental measurements (mm): intra-group comparisons T0 and T1. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group A (n = 38)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group B (n = 36)**} \\ \hline
**Baseline Data** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Difference** &
\begin{tabular}{c} _p Value_ \\ _(t Test)_ \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline Interpolar distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 45.3 & 4.2 & 45.3 & 3.2 & \(-0.1\) & 0.65 \\ \hline Intercanine distance (mesiobuccal cusp tips) & 25.9 & 2.4 & 25.9 & 3 & 0 & 0.92 \\ \hline Overjet & 2.3 & 2.1 & 2.4 & 2 & \(-0.1\) & 0.96 \\ \hline Overbite & 1.9 & 1.8 & 1.5 & 1.6 & 0.45 & 0.14 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)\(p\) < 0.01; \(\ddagger\) _p < 0.05_.  
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont_. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group A (n = 38)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Group B (n = 36)**} \\ \hline
**Cephalometric Measurements** & **Mean** & **SD** & **Difference** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} _p Value_ \\ _(t Test)_ \\ \end{tabular} & **Mean** & **SD** & **Difference** &
\begin{tabular}{c} _p Value_ \\ _(t Test)_ \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline ANB (degrees) & 4.3 & 2.1 & \(-0.3\) & 0.264 & 3.8 & 1.8 & \(-0.2\) & 0.253 \\ \hline SNB (degrees) & 76 & 2.9 & 0 & 0.414 & 75.4 & 3.1 & \(-0.3\) & 0.321 \\ \hline SNA (degrees) & 80.3 & 3.5 & \(-0.5\) & 0.099 & 79.1 & 3.3 & \(-0.7\) & 0.137 \\ \hline SN-GoGn (degrees) & 32.9 & 4.1 & 0.1 & 0.82 & 34.7 & 5.8 & \(-0.9\) & 0.009 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline SN\_ANS\_PNS (degrees) & 9.4 & 3 & \(-0.1\) & 0.787 & 10 & 3.7 & 0.7 & 0.084 \\ \hline AN\_PNS\_GoGn (degrees) & 26.1 & 3.6 & \(-0.2\) & 0.767 & 27.3 & 4.6 & 0.2 & 0.564 \\ \hline P-A face height (percentage) & 62.7 & 3.2 & 0.2 & 0.667 & 61.1 & 4.8 & 1.1 & 0.008 \({}^{*}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{*}\)\(p\) < 0.01.  
\end{table} 
Table 3: Cephalometric measurements: intra-group comparisons T0 and T1. in Group B (_t_ test = 0.028, \(p\) < 0.028); the overjet value in Group A (_t_-test = 0.011, \(p\) < 0.05); and the overbite value in Group B (_t_-test, \(p\) < 0.05). There are no statistically significant differences between Group A and Group B in terms of sagittal and vertical skeletal variables (Table 5). The difference in the maxillary intercanine distances between the groups (A and B) from T0 to T1 is statistically significant (_t_-test = 0.000, \(p\) < 0.001) (Table 6). The values for measurement of the widths of the mandible arch were unchanged after treatment in both groups. There were no statistically significant changes in the values of overjet and overbite in both groups.