Question · asked by 1 review

Superelastic NiTi arch wire vs Thermoelastic NiTi arch wire: Time to alignment

Population
People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Intervention
Superelastic NiTi arch wire
Comparison
Thermoelastic NiTi arch wire
Outcome
Time to alignment

Superelastic NiTi arch wire may leads to higher time to alignment compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire (low certainty).

What each review found

Current versions only
No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 100%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Superelastic NiTi arch wire vs Thermoelastic NiTi arch wire
Time to alignment · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch) · 16 weeks
Superelastic NiTi arch wire may leads to higher time to alignment compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire (low certainty).
Initial arch wires used in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (2024) · Cochrane All outcomes
MD 0.5 [0.21, 0.79]1 study · 32 participantsLow
Superelastic NiTi arch wire vs Thermoelastic NiTi arch wire
Time to alignment · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch) · 16 weeks
Superelastic NiTi arch wire showed no clear difference in time to alignment compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire (low certainty).
Initial arch wires used in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (2018) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD007859.PUB4, superseded
MD 0.5 [-0.78, 1.78]1 study · 50 participantsLow

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Initial arch wires used in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
2024 · Cochrane All outcomes
2022-07-04Not listedNot assessed

The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.

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.