Question · asked by 1 review
Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement): Adverse events (illness, allergy, bad taste, mucosal trauma)
- Population
- Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior fixed appliance treatment, cleft lip or palate, other craniofacial syndromes, and participants requiring orthognathic surgery
- Intervention
- Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive)
- Comparison
- Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)
- Outcome
- Adverse events (illness, allergy, bad taste, mucosal trauma)
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement) Adverse events (illness, allergy, bad taste, mucosal trauma) · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent… Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment (2017) · Cochrane All outcomes | No other adverse events identified | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2017-02 | Not listed | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.