Number of visits to complete treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Movement of upper first molars (mm) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
It is very uncertain whether intraoral distalising appliance changes movement of upper first molars (mm) compared with headgear (extraoral appliance) (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Non-compliance rate of the intervention · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Adverse effects (headgear injuries, gum health, tooth damage/decay, root resorption) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Duration of treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review
Duration of treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review
Duration of treatment (to end of molar distalisation) reported by 3 studies (120 participants); not GRADE-rated and not in a SoF table. Bondemark 2005: intraoral appliance with superelastic coils 5.2 months (SD 1) vs…
3 studies · 120 participants
GRADE not reported
Adverse effects (headgear injuries, gum health, tooth damage/decay, root resorption) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Non-compliance rate of the intervention · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Movement of upper incisor teeth (mm) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
Intraoral distalising appliance may leads to higher movement of upper incisor teeth (mm) compared with headgear (extraoral appliance) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Movement of upper first molars (mm) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review
SoF table 3 (intraoral vs other intraoral appliance). Assumed risk "Not estimated"; Corresponding risk "Not estimated"; Relative effect "Meta-analysis not appropriate". Quality: very low. Comment: "No pooled estimate…
3 studies · 93 participants
Very low
Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
Intraoral distalising appliance may leads to higher change in overjet (mm) compared with headgear (extraoral appliance) (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Number of visits to complete treatment · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
1 finding from 1 review
Movement of upper incisor teeth (mm) · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review
SoF table 3. Assumed risk "Not estimated"; Corresponding risk "Not estimated"; Relative effect "Meta-analysis not appropriate". Quality: very low. Comment: "No pooled estimate due to different types of appliances used…
2 studies · 70 participants
Very low
Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or less at the start of treatment) undergoing orthodontic treatment to distalise upper first…
1 finding from 1 review
SoF table 3. Assumed risk "Not estimated"; Corresponding risk "Not estimated"; Relative effect "Meta-analysis not appropriate". Quality: very low. Comment: "No pooled estimate due to different types of appliances used…
2 studies · 70 participants
Very low
Adverse effects · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth
1 finding from 1 review
Radiographic resorption (proxy measure for periodontal healing) at 12 months · People with avulsed and replanted permanent (front) teeth
It is very uncertain whether extra-oral pulp extirpation at day 0 changes radiographic resorption (proxy measure for periodontal healing) at… compared with intra-oral pulp extirpation at day 7 (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
Stability of correction: vertical changes of pogonion (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 pogonion (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Stability of correction: sagittal 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: sagittal changes of B-point (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
Stability of correction: sagittal changes of pogonion (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: sagittal changes of pogonion (1 week to 1… compared with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO); GRADE not reported.
1 finding from 1 review
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