What do systematic reviews say?

Patient-used 250 ppm F mouthrinse (100 ppm amine F/150 ppm NaF), daily vs 0 ppm F placebo mouthrinse, daily

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At debond (end of orthodontic treatment)
  SoF 4. Adverse effects: none of the trials reported this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

12,500 ppm F (NaF/olaflur/dectaflur) amine fluoride gel vs Placebo gel

• Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At debond; mean follow-up 16.6 months
  Additional SoF Table 1. Adverse effects: with placebo gel 0.60%; with fluoride gel 0.00% (0 to 0); difference 0.60% fewer (0.60 fewer to 0.60 fewer); relative effect not estimable; 312 participants (1 RCT); certainty…
  1 study · 312 participants
  Very low

Professionally-applied 12,300 ppm F APF foam, every 2 months vs 0 ppm F placebo foam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At debond (end of orthodontic treatment)
  SoF 2. Adverse effects: none of the trials reported this outcome.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Fluoride varnish vs Non-fluoride (placebo) varnish

• Fluorides for preventing early tooth decay (demineralised lesions) during fixed brace treatment 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At debond; follow-up 1.7 years
  SoF 1. Adverse effects: no evidence that the intervention had adverse effects; only 1 participant with an adverse event and unclear if directly related to the intervention. 148 participants (1 RCT, Sonesson 2019);…
  1 study · 148 participants
  Low

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

• Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
  No serious adverse effects were reported across five studies that assessed harms (Katchooi 2018; Lombardo 2018; Pavlin 2015; Reiss 2020; Taha 2020).
  5 studies
  GRADE not reported

Orthodontic treatment with appliances inducing stable, permanent orthodontic tooth movement (splints worn 8 to 12 weeks and surgical interventions excluded) vs Control: no treatment, placebo, or reassurance

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Orthodontics for treating temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders 2010 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At least 6 months after the intervention
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo (or no irradiation)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Non‐pharmacological interventions for alleviating pain during orthodontic treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Adverse effects: Not measured.
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Experimental chewing adjuncts (bite wafers or chewing gum) vs No chewing gum, placebo, or control (no adjunct)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Non‐pharmacological interventions for alleviating pain during orthodontic treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Adverse effects: Not measured.
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Vibratory stimulation (vibratory adjuncts) vs No vibration or placebo vibration

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Non‐pharmacological interventions for alleviating pain during orthodontic treatment 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Adverse effects: Not measured.
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Fluoride mouthrinse (0.05-0.32% sodium fluoride or amine fluoride) added to daily fluoride toothpaste vs Control: fluoride toothpaste alone, placebo mouthrinse + toothpaste, or non-fluoride (chlorhexidine) mouthrinse + toothpaste

No adverse effects were reported in any of the seven included studies (ungraded).

• Fluoride mouthrinses for prevention of initial caries in orthodontic patients - a systematic review and meta-analysis. 2025 All outcomes

  During treatment · Clinical orthodontic (fixed multi-bracket appliance) treatment
  No side- or adverse effects were reported in any of the included reports.
  7 studies · 704 participants
  GRADE not reported

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in harms: non-serious adverse effects (headache, discomfort, loosening… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct); GRADE not reported.

• Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
  RR 0.96 [0.32, 2.85]
  1 study · 45 participants
  GRADE not reported