PAR score · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear showed no clear difference in PAR score compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with headgear; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Cephalometric measurements (ANB change and front teeth inclination changes) · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found
Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Late treatment (one-phase) with removable functional appliance may leads to lower final ANB compared with no treatment (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Late treatment (one-phase) with fixed functional appliance showed no clear difference in final ANB compared with no treatment (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Activator functional appliance led to lower final ANB compared with fixed functional appliance (FORSUS FRD EZ); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Incidence of new incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase) with headgear may leads to lower incidence of new incisal trauma compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with headgear (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Incidence of new incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in… probably leads to lower incidence of new incisal trauma compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Final ANB · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Removable functional appliance may leads to lower final ANB compared with fixed functional appliance (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Bracket (bond) failure · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth
1 finding from 1 review
Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets 2018 · Cochrane All outcomesTo end of appliance treatment
Additional Table 1 summarises the proportion of bracket failures for a CC and LC composite with two different bracket bases (O'Brien 1989). The paper reported the results of applying a Mantel-Haenszel Chi2 test which…
1 study · 52 participants
GRADE not reported
Final overjet · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in… led to lower final overjet compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Composite (chemical or light cured) vs Resin-modified glass ionomer cement
Outcome not reported · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Gingival and TMJ symptoms · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found
Occlusion (net change in overjet, short term) · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Harvold Activator led to lower overjet change compared with frankel function regulator; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Bracket (bond) failure · Patients with fixed orthodontic appliances attached to their teeth
1 finding from 1 review
Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets 2018 · Cochrane All outcomesTo end of appliance treatment
The one trial article for this adhesive comparison reported the results of paired t-tests comparing different sides of the mouth. No standard deviations were presented, so we were unable to reproduce the data. The…
1 study · 60 participants
GRADE not reported
Final ANB · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in… led to lower final ANB compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance; GRADE not reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Patient discomfort · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found
Incidence of incisal trauma · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Final overjet · Adolescents (age 12 to 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Removable functional appliance may leads to higher final overjet compared with fixed functional appliance (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Incidence of incisal trauma · Children (7 to 11 years) and adolescents (12 to 16 years) with prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion)
Early treatment (two-phase: phase 1 in childhood, phase 2 in… showed no clear difference in incidence of incisal trauma compared with late treatment (one-phase in adolescence) with functional appliance; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Quality of life · Children (80% aged <= 16 years) with a Class II division 2 malocclusion (deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found