Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,954 questions · 2,335 findings · 149 reviews · Oral Health

No studies found 436 · 18.7%GRADE not reported 1,370 · 58.7%Very low 254 · 10.9%Low 173 · 7.4%Moderate 80 · 3.4%High 22 · 0.9%

Vibrational appliance with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances

Harms (orthodontically-induced inflammatory root resorption) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for crowded teeth in children 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    end of alignment
    Using a vibrational appliance did not affect amount of root resorption vs control (Woodhouse 2015; 72 participants analysed). Narrative; no pooled estimate.
    1 study · 72 participants
    GRADE not reported

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Time for ligation (seconds, to ligate six brackets) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Self-ligating brackets led to lower time for ligation (seconds, to ligate six brackets) compared with conventional brackets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Bone-borne expansion vs Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax)

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Bone-borne expansion showed no clear difference in molar expansion (inter-molar distance) compared with fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Coating material (bonding material or sealant) WITH fluoride release vs Coating material WITHOUT fluoride release

White spot lesions assessed by laser fluorescence (DIAGNOdent) · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances

White spot lesions were also measured by laser fluorescence in 3 fluoride-vs-non-fluoride studies, but no meta-analysis was possible due to incompatible reporting.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy vs no treatment

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Fixed bonded Hyrax appliance followed by U-bow activator therapy showed no clear difference in molar expansion compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    12 months after start of treatment
    U-bow activator 5.1 mm vs untreated 0.8 mm; P<0.001 (no SD reported); significant in favour of treatment
    1 study · 66 participants
    GRADE not reported

Semi-rapid maxillary expansion vs Rapid maxillary expansion

Canine expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Semi-rapid maxillary expansion showed no clear difference in canine expansion compared with rapid maxillary expansion; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances

Amount of crowding · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

It is very uncertain whether lacebacks with fixed appliances changes amount of crowding (change) at 6 months compared with fixed appliances only (control) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) vs observation

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…

Removable tooth-borne expansion (expansion plate) probably leads to higher molar expansion (inter-molar distance) compared with observation (no treatment) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with xenograft (bone graft) vs Extraction alone

Need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with xenograft (bone graft) changes need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement compared with extraction alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with allograft (bone graft) vs ARP with xenograft

Need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

It is very uncertain whether ARP with allograft changes need for additional augmentation prior to implant placement compared with ARP with xenograft (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) led to higher size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast vs ARP with xenograft

Complications (e.g. discomfort, pain and swelling) · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…
1 finding from 1 review

ARP with alloplast plus barrier membrane vs ARP with alloplast without membrane

Implant failure rate · Adults aged 18 years or older, in good general health (including well-controlled systemic disease), requiring extraction of one or more…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed tooth-borne expansion (Hyrax) vs Fixed fan-type expander

Molar expansion · Children and adults with a posterior crossbite, without a Class III skeletal relationship, cleft lip or palate (or both), or other…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
    post-treatment 3 weeks
    Gopalakrishnan 2017: Hyrax 8.00 (SD 2.19) mm vs fan-type 1.83 (SD 0.41) mm; P<0.001 (greater intermolar expansion with Hyrax)
    1 study · 12 participants
    GRADE not reported