Search

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

488 questions · 529 findings · 33 reviews · Orthodontics · related questions CL0289

No studies found 117 · 22.1%GRADE not reported 263 · 49.7%Very low 65 · 12.3%Low 60 · 11.3%Moderate 21 · 4%High 3 · 0.6%

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Time to alignment · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Self-ligating brackets showed no clear difference in time to alignment (days) compared with conventional brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Cervical pull headgear vs Minor interceptive procedures (control)

Position of the incisors (upper incisor inclination) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Cervical pull headgear led to higher upper incisors to maxilla at 2 years compared with minor interceptive procedures (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) vs No active treatment (control)

Amount of crowding · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) changes amount of crowding (Little's Irregularity Index, change) at 5 years compared with no active treatment (control) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lingual arch led to higher size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length) at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of lower deciduous canines vs No active treatment (control)

Lower incisor inclination (lingual tipping and retrusion) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Extraction of lower deciduous canines showed no clear difference in lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees) at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of the primary (baby) canine (single primary tooth extraction) vs No extraction (non-intervention control)

Patient-reported outcomes (pain, discomfort and analgesic use) · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
1 finding from 1 review

Semi-rapid maxillary expansion vs Rapid maxillary expansion

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Semi-rapid maxillary expansion showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with rapid maxillary expansion; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction vs Single primary (canine) tooth extraction

Reported improvement in the position of the ectopic canine measured from radiographs · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Schwarz appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Position of the incisors (upper incisor inclination) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Schwarz appliance showed no clear difference in upper incisors to maxilla (inclination, degrees) at 9 months compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) vs observation

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) probably leads to higher molar expansion (inter-molar distance) compared with observation (no treatment) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Eruption guidance appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Amount of crowding (number of children with crowding, mandible) after 1 year · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether eruption guidance appliance changes amount of crowding (number of children with crowding, mandible)… compared with no active treatment (control) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Bone-borne expansion vs observation

Crossbite correction · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Adolescents
    Alberta 2010: bone-borne expansion corrected all posterior crossbites (21/21); no self-correction in the untreated group
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Lower incisor inclination (lingual tipping and retrusion) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Self-ligating brackets showed no clear difference in lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees) compared with conventional brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Coaxial nickel-titanium archwire vs Nickel-titanium archwire

Amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether coaxial nickel-titanium archwire changes amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks compared with nickel-titanium archwire (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in canine expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 3.6 mm vs untreated 1 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) vs Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate)

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (quad-helix) may leads to higher canine expansion (inter-canine distance) compared with removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance vs Expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Quad-helix plus multi-bracket appliance showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with expansion arch plus multi-bracket appliance; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review