Cochrane · intervention · CD002283
Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces
Martin, C, Littlewood, SJ, Millett, DT, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · Cochrane Library
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full review (methods and results), not only its Summary of Findings table.
Questions
33
current version
GRADE rated
17
No studies
11
Included studies
47
as reported
No studies 11 · 33.3%Ungraded 5 · 15.2%Very low 15 · 45.5%Low 2 · 6.1%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Review question
| Element | Planned (methods) | Found (results) |
|---|---|---|
| Population | Children and adults who have had retainers fitted or adjunctive procedures undertaken following treatment with orthodontic braces. There was no restriction for the presenting malocclusion or type of active orthodontic treatment undertaken. The participants had to be followed up at least three months after completing their orthodontic treatment. Excluded: people who had surgical correction of the jaws; people with a cleft lip or palate, or both, or other craniofacial syndrome; people who had orthodontic treatment based on extractions alone or the fitting of a passive space maintainer, or both | Forty-seven studies were identified that fulfilled the criteria of the review. All studies were parallel randomised controlled trials. Forty-seven studies were parallel-design studies and one was a cross-over clinical study. Thirty-eight studies were two-arm studies, seven were three-arm studies, and three were four-arm studies |
| Intervention | Retainers or adjunctive procedures, or both, after treatment with orthodontic braces. We included only studies where the full course of definitive orthodontic treatment was completed - we excluded data on retention strategies at the end of an initial phase of removable or functional appliance treatment. We excluded studies comparing techniques (not materials) for placing the bonded retainers. We did not include studies on aligners in this review | Circumferential supracrestal fiberotomy and removable retainer (n=2); Three types of fixed retainers and removable retainer (n=1); Hawley removable retainer (n=1); Multistrand wire versus direct-bonded polyethylene ribbon-reinforced resin composite for lingual retention (n=1); Modified thermoplastic retainer versus full coverage thermoplastic retainer (n=1); Part-time versus full-time wear of thermoplastic retainers (n=2); Begg retainers versus thermoplastic retainers (n=1); Hawley retainers versus thermoplastic retainers (n=10); Part-time versus full-time wear of Hawley retainers (n=1); Different types of fixed retainers (n=25); Lower multistrand stainless steel versus lower thermoplastic (n=2); Upper removable and lower fixed retainer versus upper removable retainer and lower adjunctive procedure (n=1); Upper removable and lower fixed retainer versus positioner (n=1) |
| Comparison | Fixed retainers/Removable retainers/No retainers/Hard tissue adjunctive procedures/Soft tissue adjunctive procedures | Removable retainer full time (n=2); Removable retainer nights only (n=1); Clear overlay removable retainer (n=1); Direct-bonded polyethylene ribbon-reinforced resin composite (n=1); Full coverage thermoplastic retainer (n=1); Full-time wear of thermoplastic retainers (n=2); Thermoplastic retainers (n=1); Hawley retainers (n=10); Full-time wear of Hawley retainers (n=1); Multistrand bonded retainers (n=25); Lower thermoplastic (n=2); Upper removable retainer and lower adjunctive procedure (n=1); Positioner (n=1) |
| Outcomes | Assessment of how well the teeth were stabilised using index of tooth irregularity (e.g. Little's index) or how the teeth meet together using index such as PAR index at least 3 months after fitting of retainer; Survival of the retainers assessed by how long they lasted without breaking (in months) or how many times they needed to be replaced or repaired during wear; Quality of life assessed in terms of patient's satisfaction; Adverse effects on health of teeth (decay assessed using indices of demineralisation) and surrounding structures (gums and other supporting structures assessed using periodontal indices or other markers of periodontal disease) | Assessment of stability (n=27); Survival of retainers (n=27); Patient satisfaction (n=14); Adverse effects on oral health (n=15) |
| Study designs | Randomised controlled trials | NR |
| Timing | At least 3 months after the fitting of the retainer and/or after adjunctive procedure was carried out | At 1 year after debond (n=1); After 3 months (n=1); Over 3 years (n=1); Over 6 months (n=1); Over 2 years (n=1); Three months (n=17); Six months (n=25); Nine months (n=5); One year (n=20); 18 months (n=4); Two years (n=8); Three years (n=1); Four years (n=1); Five years (n=1); Six years (n=1) |
Search date: April 2022. Databases: Cochrane Oral Health Trials Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid; OpenGrey
Questions and results
Show all 5 versionsHawley removable retainer vs Clear plastic removable retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 0.01 [-0.65, 0.67] 0.01 [-0.65, 0.67] mm | 1 study · 30 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Survival of retainers (failure, upper and lower arches) 12 months · upper and lower arches | RR 0.60 [0.43, 0.83] | 1 study · 111 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Patient satisfaction: comfort (VAS, upper and lower arches) 12 months · upper and lower arches | No RCTs at 12 months; 1 RCT at 6 months: Hawley less comfortable (VAS MD -1.86, 95% CI -2.19 to -1.53; very low-certainty) | 0 studies | No studies |
Adverse effects on oral health 12 months · lower arch | Not measured | 0 studies | No studies |
Fibre-reinforced composite fixed (bonded) retainer vs Multistrand / spiral wire fixed (bonded) retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Patient satisfaction: aesthetics (VAS 0-10 cm, lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 1.49 [0.76, 2.22] 1.49 [0.76, 2.22] VAS points | 1 study · 32 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 1.01 [0.84, 1.21] | 7 studies · 1337 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Adverse effects on oral health: bleeding on probing (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | No RCTs at 12-month follow-up; 1 RCT at 6 months found no difference (very low-certainty) | 0 studies | No studies |
Survival: mean survival time (lower arch, months) 12 months · lower arch | No RCTs at 12-month follow-up; 2 RCTs at 24 months: earlier failures with fibre-reinforced composite (MD -1.48, 95% CI -1.88 to -1.08; very low-certainty) | 0 studies | No studies |
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD -0.70 [-1.17, -0.23] -0.70 [-1.17, -0.23] mm | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Adverse effects on oral health: Gingival Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | No RCTs at 12-month follow-up; 1 RCT at 6 months: higher gingival inflammation with fibre-reinforced composite (MD 0.59, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.05; very low-certainty) | 0 studies | No studies |
Full-time clear plastic (removable) retainer vs Any type of fixed (bonded) retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 3.42 [1.38, 8.47] | 1 study · 77 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Patient satisfaction: discomfort/pain (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | No studies measured or reported this outcome | 0 studies | No studies |
Adverse effects on oral health: gingival bleeding (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 0.53 [0.31, 0.88] | 1 study · 84 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 0.60 [0.17, 1.03] 0.60 [0.17, 1.03] mm | 1 study · 84 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Adverse effects on oral health: caries (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RD 0.00 [-0.05, 0.05] 0.00 [-0.05, 0.05] proportion | 1 study · 84 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Full-time wear of clear plastic (thermoplastic) removable retainer vs Part-time wear of clear plastic (thermoplastic) removable retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index 12 months · upper and lower arches | no estimate extracted | 3 studies | Ungraded |
Full-time wear of removable retainer (any type) vs Part-time wear of removable retainer (any type)
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Patient satisfaction 12 months · lower arch | Not measured | 0 studies | No studies |
Adverse effects on oral health 12 months · lower arch | Not measured | 0 studies | No studies |
Survival of retainers 12 months · lower arch | Not measured | 0 studies | No studies |
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 0.20 [-0.28, 0.68] 0.20 [-0.28, 0.68] mm | 1 study · 52 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Upper clear plastic retainer + lower fixed canine-to-canine retainer vs Upper clear plastic retainer + lower interproximal reduction (adjunctive), no lower retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 2 years · lower arch | MD -0.30 [-0.73, 0.13] | 1 study · 47 participants | Ungraded |
Upper clear plastic retainer + lower fixed canine-to-canine retainer vs Positioner
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 2 years · lower arch | MD -1.00 [-1.65, -0.35] | 1 study · 46 participants | Ungraded |
Upper clear plastic retainer + lower interproximal reduction (adjunctive) vs Positioner
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 2 years · lower arch | MD -0.70 [-1.37, -0.03] | 1 study · 45 participants | Ungraded |
Part-time clear plastic (removable) retainer vs Any type of fixed (bonded) retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 0.92 [0.23, 1.61] 0.92 [0.23, 1.61] mm | 1 study · 56 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 0.44 [0.20, 0.98] | 1 study · 57 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Adverse effects on oral health: Gingival Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD -0.34 [-0.66, -0.02] -0.34 [-0.66, -0.02] index points | 1 study · 59 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Patient satisfaction: discomfort/pain (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 12.22 [1.69, 88.52] | 1 study · 57 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
CAD/CAM nitinol fixed (bonded) retainer vs Conventional/analogue multistrand fixed (bonded) retainer
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Patient satisfaction: discomfort/pain (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | No studies measured or reported this outcome | 0 studies | No studies |
Survival of retainers (failure, lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | RR 1.29 [0.67, 2.49] | 1 study · 41 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Adverse effects on oral health: Gingival Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD 0.00 [-0.16, 0.16] 0.00 [-0.16, 0.16] index points | 2 studies · 107 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Adverse effects on oral health: bleeding on probing (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | No RCTs at 12-month follow-up; 2 RCTs at 6 months found no difference (low-certainty) | 0 studies | No studies |
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (lower arch) 12 months · lower arch | MD -0.46 [-0.72, -0.21] -0.46 [-0.72, -0.21] mm | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, publication bias |
Upper fixed (bonded) retainer vs No retention
Population: People who had received fixed appliance orthodontic treatment
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Stability: Little's Irregularity Index (upper arch) 2 years · upper arch | MD -0.90 [-1.33, -0.47] | 1 study · 63 participants | Ungraded |