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
Rate of orthodontic tooth movement with removable orthodontic aligners · 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 with removable orthodontic aligners compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage (maxillary canine distalisation), mm/day · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
It is very uncertain whether light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation changes rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Orthodontically-induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) during molar intrusion · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
1 finding from 1 review
Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during alignment stage · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during alignment stage (reduction… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Harms: non-serious adverse effects (headache, discomfort, loosening of temporary anchorage devices) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
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.
1 finding from 1 review
Overall treatment time wearing orthodontic appliances · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in duration of orthodontic treatment compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during treatment · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances
Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Side effects or other adverse events · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Duration of orthodontic treatment: alignment stage (mandibular arch) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
It is very uncertain whether light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation changes duration of orthodontic treatment: alignment stage (mandibular arch) compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Reported incidence or prevalence of root resorption of the impacted canine and/or incisors and/or first premolars · 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
Incidence of eruption of the PDC into the mouth · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction led to higher incidence of eruption of the PDC into the mouth compared with single primary (canine) tooth extraction; GRADE not reported.
4 findings from 1 review
RR 1.28 [1.06, 1.54]
2 studies · 96 participants
GRADE not reported
RR 0.68 [0.35, 1.31]
3 studies · 119 participants
Very low
RR 0.61 [0.29, 1.25]
1 study · 23 participants
GRADE not reported
Show 1 more finding
Effect of severity of PDC displacement towards the midline on the proportion of successful eruptions · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
1 finding from 1 review
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
Root resorption of adjacent permanent teeth caused by the PDC · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
Extraction of the primary (baby) canine (single primary tooth… showed no clear difference in root resorption of adjacent permanent teeth caused by the PDC compared with no extraction (non-intervention control); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Effect of severity of PDC displacement towards the midline on the proportion of successful eruptions · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
1 finding from 1 review
Table 4 (Naoumova 2015): probability of successful eruption depended on displacement severity; sector 2 (mild) 14/19 (74%) erupted vs sector 4 0/10 erupted; data refer to 59 teeth (mITT).
1 study · 59 participants
GRADE not reported
Incidence of successfully erupted PDC that were favourably positioned · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction showed no clear difference in incidence of successfully erupted PDC that were favourably positioned compared with single primary (canine) tooth extraction; GRADE not reported.
3 findings from 1 review
RR 1.64 [0.33, 8.03]
1 study · 23 participants
GRADE not reported
RR 1.09 [0.08, 15.42]
1 study · 23 participants
GRADE not reported
RR 1.64 [0.33, 8.03]
1 study · 23 participants
GRADE not reported
Any other adverse effects of the interventions, such as gingival disease and demineralisation · 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
Time taken for the canine to erupt into the mouth · 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
no estimate extracted
0 studies
No studies found
Number of participants referred for surgical exposure of the PDC · Young people aged 9 to 14 years diagnosed with one or both palatally displaced permanent maxillary canines (PDC)
It is very uncertain whether double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction changes number of participants referred for surgical exposure of the PDC compared with single primary (canine) tooth extraction (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review