Success or failure of the anchorage device · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
1 finding from 1 review
Acceptability · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
1 finding from 1 review
Reported narratively in 1 study (Feldmann 2007): limitations in daily life and jaw function were low to moderate throughout the trial with no differences between anchorage groups; impact on mood and appearance peaked…
1 study · 113 participants
GRADE not reported
Adverse events · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Mesiodistal movement of the upper first permanent molar · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) probably leads to lower mesiodistal movement of the upper first permanent molar compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.) (moderate certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Residual overjet at the end of treatment · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Patient discomfort · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
1 finding from 1 review
Reported narratively in 2 studies (Chesterfield 2007, 47 patients; Feldmann 2007, 113 patients) on a VAS 0-100; discomfort most severe the evening after surgery (Nobel-Biocare onplant median 33, IQR 0-96) and after…
2 studies · 160 participants
GRADE not reported
Duration of overall treatment · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) showed no clear difference in duration of overall treatment compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Duration of space closure · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) showed no clear difference in duration of space closure compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Number of visits · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
Surgical anchorage (mini-screw or mid-palatal implant) led to higher number of visits compared with conventional anchorage (headgear, transpalatal/palatal arch, etc.); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Patient perception: pain · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
1 finding from 1 review
Reported narratively in 1 study (Feldmann 2007) on a VAS 0-100; the first evening after the intervention pain was significantly higher for surgical group A (P=0.002) and conventional group C (P=0.007) than surgical…
1 study · 113 participants
GRADE not reported
Economic factors · Patients of any age undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and requiring anchorage (adolescents to adults up to 48-54 years)
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
For resin-based bonding agents, fluoride release did not significantly change WSL initiation (RR 0.97); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
For compomer-based bonding agents, fluoride release did not significantly change WSL initiation (RR 0.71); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
For a glass-ionomer-based bonding agent (single study), fluoride release significantly reduced WSL initiation (RR 0.64); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
Among fluoride-releasing sealants, the reduction in WSL initiation versus no sealant was not statistically significant (RR 0.69); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
Among non-fluoride sealants, WSL initiation was significantly reduced versus no sealant (RR 0.69); subgroup not separately GRADE-rated.
1 finding from 1 review
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 sealant-vs-no-sealant studies, but no meta-analysis was possible due to incompatible reporting.
1 finding from 1 review
Initiation of white spot lesions (WSL), visual-tactile assessment · Patients of any age (11-40 years) receiving comprehensive/fixed orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances
The additional use of a sealant probably reduces the initiation of white spot lesions during fixed orthodontic treatment compared with no sealant (RR 0.70), but the certainty of evidence is very low.
1 finding from 1 review
Amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 10 weeks · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
It is very uncertain whether cervical pull headgear changes amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 2 years compared with minor interceptive procedures (control) (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Position of the incisors (upper incisor inclination) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
Cervical pull headgear led to higher upper incisors to maxilla at 2 years compared with minor interceptive procedures (control); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review