Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

44 questions · 44 findings · 4 reviews · Orthodontics · All outcomes

No studies found 8 · 18.2%GRADE not reported 31 · 70.5%Very low 3 · 6.8%Low 2 · 4.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Frankel's function regulator-4 (FR-4) with lip-seal training vs no treatment

Stability of anterior open bite correction (1 year after treatment) · Children and adolescents (over 80% aged 16 years or younger at treatment start) with anterior open bite (lack of vertical overlap or…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Frankel's function regulator-4 (FR-4) with lip-seal training vs no treatment

Failure to correct the anterior open bite (open bite not closed) · Children and adolescents (over 80% aged 16 years or younger at treatment start) with anterior open bite (lack of vertical overlap or…

Frankel's function regulator-4 (FR-4) with lip-seal training led to lower failure to correct the anterior open bite (open bite not closed) compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Repelling-magnet splints vs Bite-blocks

Anterior open bite correction · Children and adolescents (over 80% aged 16 years or younger at treatment start) with anterior open bite (lack of vertical overlap or…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Orthodontic and orthopaedic treatment for anterior open bite in children 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes
    About 4 months (treatment interrupted early)
    Could not be analysed statistically. After 4 months the open bite was observed to close in the magnet group, but in four out of these ten patients transverse problems (unilateral crossbite) were observed, which led to…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Removable appliance with palatal crib associated with high-pull chincup vs no treatment

Failure to correct the anterior open bite (open bite not closed) · Children and adolescents (over 80% aged 16 years or younger at treatment start) with anterior open bite (lack of vertical overlap or…

Removable appliance with palatal crib associated with high-pull… led to lower failure to correct the anterior open bite (open bite not closed) compared with no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: midbuccal gingival recession (mm) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: midbuccal gingival recession (mm) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Probing pocket depth · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: periodontal probing depth compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Complications or adverse effects · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Pain intensity (0‐10cm visual analogue scale) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: pain/soreness score (visual analogue scale 1 to 10) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Treatment time: time from surgical exposure to eruption/bonding a bracket · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure led to lower treatment time: time from surgical exposure to eruption/bonding a… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Discomfort/pain · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal position in the dental arch · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal position in the dental arch compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: bleeding on probing (Papilla Bleeding Index) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: gingival recession (six-point probing) compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating, brushing, speaking, bad taste) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: total discomfort score (pain, difficulty eating,… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth inclination · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth inclination compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: moderate or severe pain at 1 day postoperative · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: moderate or severe pain at 1 day postoperative compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Treatment time: duration of orthodontic treatment (placement to removal of fixed appliances) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in treatment time: duration of orthodontic treatment (placement to… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Gum health: midpalatal gingival recession · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in gum health: midpalatal gingival recession compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Patient response: satisfaction with treatment (satisfactory vs unsatisfactory) · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in patient response: satisfaction with treatment (satisfactory vs… compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure

Aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth colour · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)

Open surgical exposure showed no clear difference in aesthetics: canine rated as abnormal tooth colour compared with closed surgical exposure; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review