Stability of correction: vertical changes of B-point (1 week to 1 year) · Adults (16 years of age or older) with an Angle Class III malocclusion (prominent lower front teeth); people with syndromes, clefts or…
Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) showed no clear difference in stability of correction: vertical changes of B-point (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
At least 50% reduction in pain · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…
Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… led to higher achieving at least 50% pain relief at 4 hours (using pain intensity… compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.
3 findings from 1 review
RR 4.87 [2.83, 8.37]
17 studies · 1658 participants
GRADE not reported
RR 3.41 [2.34, 4.97]
13 studies · 1184 participants
GRADE not reported
RR 2.85 [1.89, 4.29]
16 studies · 1498 participants
GRADE not reported
Patients with one or more adverse events · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…
Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… showed no clear difference in patients with one or more adverse events compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Participant‐reported pain relief of 50% or greater · Patients requiring surgical removal of a lower wisdom tooth or teeth, with baseline moderate to severe pain (surgery under local…
Paracetamol (single oral dose, any dose or formulation; subgroups up… led to higher achieving at least 50% pain relief at 6 hours (using pain relief… compared with placebo; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Root resorption · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Time to next/working arch wire · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Thermoelastic copper NiTi (CuNiTi) arch wire showed no clear difference in time to next/working arch wire compared with conventional NiTi arch wire; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Alignment rate · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Single-strand superelastic NiTi arch wire probably leads to lower alignment rate compared with coaxial superelastic NiTi arch wire (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Root resorption · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Pain · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Pain: not reported
0 studies
No studies found
Time to alignment · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Root resorption · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Root resorption · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
It is very uncertain whether superelastic NiTi arch wire changes root resorption (reduction in root length) compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Time to next/working arch wire · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Superelastic NiTi arch wire showed no clear difference in time to next/working arch wire compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire; GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Time to alignment · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Pain · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
1 finding from 1 review
Different sizes of NiTi wires (Alhaija 2021; Erdinc 2004); not pooled due to clinical heterogeneity; little or no difference at day 1. Erdinc 0.014 vs 0.016 inch higher pain at day 4 MD 5.00 (0.19 to 9.81) and day 6 MD…
2 studies · 149 participants
Low
Alignment rate · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
It is very uncertain whether thermoelastic copper NiTi (CuNiTi) arch wire changes alignment rate compared with conventional NiTi arch wire (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Pain day 1 · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Superelastic NiTi arch wire showed no clear difference in pain day 1 compared with conventional (stabilised) NiTi arch wire (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Time to alignment · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
Superelastic NiTi arch wire may leads to higher time to alignment compared with thermoelastic NiTi arch wire (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Time to next/working arch wire · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Time to next/working arch wire · People receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (upper and/or lower full arch)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review