Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

166 questions · 194 findings · 13 reviews · Orthodontics

No studies found 81 · 41.8%GRADE not reported 62 · 32%Very low 35 · 18%Low 13 · 6.7%Moderate 3 · 1.5%High 0 · 0%

Aversive tasting substance applied to digit vs Psychological intervention (habit reversal)

Sucking cessation (short term) · Children with a non-nutritive sucking habit (digit or pacifier)

Aversive tasting substance applied to digit showed no clear difference in sucking cessation (short term) compared with psychological intervention (habit reversal); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Any orthodontic and/or surgical treatment for Angle Class III malocclusion vs no intervention or another intervention

Correction of prominent lower front teeth / effectiveness of treatment (planned primary outcome) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review
  • No included study measured the planned primary outcome. Discussion: 'The primary outcome proposed for this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments for prognathism, but none of the studies conclusively…
    Studies not reported
    No studies found

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Costs · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Change in angulation of teeth adjacent to the space (molar and canine tipping/rotation) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage (maxillary arch), mm/month · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether low level laser therapy (LLLT) changes rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Side effects or other adverse events · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Periodontal health during molar intrusion · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during alignment stage · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether low level laser therapy (LLLT) changes total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Duration of orthodontic treatment during alignment stage · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether low level laser therapy (LLLT) changes duration of orthodontic treatment during alignment stage compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Harms (orthodontically-induced inflammatory root resorption) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in harms and side effects: orthodontically-induced inflammatory root… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Patient-reported need for analgesics · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during treatment · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Overall treatment time wearing orthodontic appliances · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

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

Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during alignment stage · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Harms: serious adverse effects · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Rate of orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during space closure stage (en masse, mm/month) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in rate of orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during space closure stage… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review