Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

54 questions · 67 findings · 6 reviews

No studies found 24 · 35.8%GRADE not reported 15 · 22.4%Very low 20 · 29.9%Low 8 · 11.9%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy)

Midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale, subnasale, stomion superius, labrale superius) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or complete unilateral…

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in midfacial soft tissue changes (facial profile landmarks: pronasale,… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy)

Velopharyngeal function (complete velopharyngeal closure; deterioration/improvement) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or complete unilateral…

It is very uncertain whether maxillary distraction osteogenesis changes velopharyngeal function (complete velopharyngeal closure;… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy)

Psychological status: satisfaction with life (Satisfaction With Life Scale, SWLS) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or complete unilateral…

It is very uncertain whether maxillary distraction osteogenesis changes psychological status: satisfaction with life (Satisfaction With Life… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy)

Maxillary advancement (midfacial hard tissue change; Subspinale A-point) · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or complete unilateral…

It is very uncertain whether maxillary distraction osteogenesis changes maxillary advancement (midfacial hard tissue change; Subspinale… compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis vs Orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy)

Speech: nasal emission · Adolescents or adults (15 years or older) with an established diagnosis of complete cleft lip and alveolar process, or complete unilateral…

Maxillary distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in speech: nasal emission compared with orthognathic surgery (conventional Le Fort I osteotomy); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Successful LA/painless treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Anxiety · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

Audiovisual distraction led to lower pre- and post-operative anxiety measures (Modified Child Dental… compared with conventional treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Self- or observational assessment of intraoperative distress/pain/acceptance of treatment during provision of LA: pain-related behaviour during LA (negative vs positive behaviour; Frankl Behaviour Rating Scale) · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

It is very uncertain whether audiovisual distraction changes self- or observational assessment of intraoperative… compared with conventional treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Completion of dental treatment · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Patient satisfaction: measured by questionnaires · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Audiovisual distraction vs Conventional treatment

Adverse effects: pain on injection (solution deposition), Heft-Parker VAS 0-170 mm · Children and adolescents having dental treatment under local anaesthetic without general anaesthesia

Audiovisual distraction showed no clear difference in pain on injection (Wong-Baker Faces Pain Rating Scale, after… compared with conventional treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus)

Augmentation procedure (partial) failure · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in augmentation procedure (partial) failure compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus)

Marginal bone level change · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in 1-year post-loading bone level changes compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest)

Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis led to higher vertical bone gain compared with autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest)

Complications · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complications compared with autogenous inlay bone graft (iliac crest); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus)

Vertical bone gain · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in vertical bone gain compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus)

Complication at augmentation + donor site · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complication at augmented + donor site compared with autogenous onlay bone graft (mandibular ramus); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Vertical distraction osteogenesis vs Vertical GBR with non-resorbable barriers + particulate autogenous bone

Complication at augmentation + donor site · Patients with vertically deficient posterior/anterior mandibular ridges needing implants

Vertical distraction osteogenesis showed no clear difference in complication at augmentation + donor site compared with vertical GBR with non-resorbable barriers + particulate autogenous…; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review