What do systematic reviews say?

4 questions · 4 findings · 2 reviews · Orthodontics

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 1 · 25%Very low 2 · 50%Low 1 · 25%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Closest answers

The findings closest to your search, judged one by one by TypeSafe's Jev model.

Direct match · question page
- Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.) · Patient perception: discomfort
  Reinforcement of anchorage during orthodontic brace treatment with implants or other surgical methods 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Reported narratively in 2 studies (Chesterfield 2007, 47 patients; Feldmann 2007, 113 patients) on a VAS 0-100; discomfort most severe the evening after surgery (Nobel-Biocare onplant median 33, IQR 0-96) and after…
  2 studies · 160 participants
  GRADE not reported
Direct match · question page
- Low level laser therapy (LLLT) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment · Patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm)
  Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Space closure / first visit
  MD -0.4 [-1.87, 1.07]
  1 study · 37 participants
  Very low
Direct match · question page
- Light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment · Patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm)
  Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
  First visit
  MD -0.80 [-2.20, 0.62]
  1 study · 39 participants
  Very low
Direct match · question page
- Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) · Patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm), immediately after ligation of initial archwire
  Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Immediately after ligation of initial archwire (also 4-8h, 1, 3, 7 days)
  MD 2.56 [-2.35, 7.47]
  3 studies · 153 participants
  Low

Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) vs Conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.)

Patient discomfort · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)

1 finding from 1 review

Reinforcement of anchorage during orthodontic brace treatment with implants or other surgical methods 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes
Reported narratively in 2 studies (Chesterfield 2007, 47 patients; Feldmann 2007, 113 patients) on a VAS 0-100; discomfort most severe the evening after surgery (Nobel-Biocare onplant median 33, IQR 0-96) and after…
2 studies · 160 participants
GRADE not reported

Light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Discomfort/pain · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation changes patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm) compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
First visit
MD -0.80 [-2.20, 0.62]
1 study · 39 participants
Very low

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Discomfort/pain · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether low level laser therapy (LLLT) changes patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm) compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
Space closure / first visit
MD -0.4 [-1.87, 1.07]
1 study · 37 participants
Very low

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Discomfort/pain · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in patient perception of pain and discomfort (VAS 0 to 100 mm),… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical adjunctive interventions for accelerating tooth movement in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment 2023 · Cochrane All outcomes
Immediately after ligation of initial archwire (also 4-8h, 1, 3, 7 days)
MD 2.56 [-2.35, 7.47]
3 studies · 153 participants
Low