Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

19 questions · 20 findings · 4 reviews · Orthodontics · All outcomes

No studies found 9 · 45%GRADE not reported 5 · 25%Very low 2 · 10%Low 4 · 20%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary protractor, Pushing Splints, modified tandem, Reverse Forsus, reverse Twin Block, reverse chin cup, tongue appliance, Frankel III)

Perceived need for surgery in adulthood · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Surgically-anchored orthodontic treatment (miniplates) vs no intervention

Perceived need for surgery in adulthood · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Surgically-anchored appliance (miniscrews or miniplates)

Perceived need for surgery in adulthood · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask vs no intervention

Perceived need for surgery in adulthood · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

Facemask may leads to higher perceived need for surgery in adulthood compared with untreated control (no treatment) (low certainty).

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

Success of surgery (eruption of the canine crown sufficient for orthodontic alignment, without repeated surgery) · 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 success of surgery (eruption of the canine crown sufficient for… compared with closed surgical exposure (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (chemically-cured composite, light-cured composite, conventional glass ionomer, poly-acid modified composite/compomer, or resin-modified glass ionomer) vs Any other type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes

First-time bond failure · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

Decalcification · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher decalcification (participant level) compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

First time failure at participant level · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher first time failure at participant level compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

One type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (chemically-cured composite, light-cured composite, conventional glass ionomer, poly-acid modified composite/compomer, or resin-modified glass ionomer) vs Any other type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes

Decalcification (presence or absence of decay around the attachment) · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) vs Molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement)

First time failure at tooth level · Participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes bonded to first or second permanent molars; excludes prior…

Bonded molar tubes (attached with adhesive) led to higher first time failure at tooth level compared with molar bands (cemented, e.g. with glass ionomer cement); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Duration of orthodontic treatment, number of visits during active treatment (scheduled and unscheduled) and duration of visits · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Patient satisfaction with treatment Measured by a validated scale · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Prolonged stability of treatment (adjudged using an accepted scale) · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Rate of orthodontic tooth movement with removable orthodontic aligners · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically… may leads to higher rate of tooth movement (orthodontic tooth movement in mm at 3 months) compared with conventional treatment: fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment… (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Harms arising during orthodontic treatment (gingival and periodontal problems, anchorage loss and iatrogenic damage to teeth e.g. caries/decalcification, root resorption); only periodontal/gingival health assessed · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…
1 finding from 1 review
  • SoF: Assumed risk 'See comment'; Corresponding risk 'See comment'; 13 (1 study, split‐mouth); Quality ⊕⊖⊖⊖ very low. Comment: 'Gingival and periodonal problems only were assesed in 1 study (Aboul‐Ela 2011). No precise…
    1 study · 13 participants
    Very low

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Discomfort/pain · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Surgical adjunctive procedures for accelerating orthodontic treatment 2015 · Cochrane All outcomes
    24 hours to 28 days
    Results: 'Pain experience was compared between surgical and non‐surgical cases in a single study (Alikhani 2013). Within 24 hours of appliance activation and canine retraction, both groups reported higher levels of…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Fixed-appliance orthodontic treatment incorporating surgically assisted orthodontics (adjunctive surgical procedure: corticotomy, micro-osteoperforation or interseptal bone reduction) to increase the rate of tooth movement vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Improvement in occlusion (Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) or other validated scale) · Individuals of any age receiving orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (braces) (people requiring orthodontic tooth movement);…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review