Cochrane · intervention · CD003453

Orthodontic treatment for crowded teeth in children

Turner, S, Harrison, JE, Sharif, FNJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021 · Cochrane Library

Oral HealthOrthodontics2 versionsAMSTAR 2: not assessed
Full textEvery question was extracted from the full review (methods and results), not only its Summary of Findings table.
Questions
44
current version
GRADE rated
15
No studies
0
Included studies
24
as reported
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 29 · 65.9%Very low 15 · 34.1%Low 0 · 0%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

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationChildren (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth; studies with cleft lip/palate or other craniofacial syndromes excluded; studies with <80% of participants aged 16 or under excluded1512 participants randomised, 1314 analysed; mean age 7.6 to 15.3 years; 15 studies reported gender (male 23.3% to 58.8%)
InterventionFixed appliances and auxiliaries; removable appliances and auxiliaries; extractions (any intervention or combination, at any time during treatment)Fixed appliances and auxiliaries (n=20); Removable appliances and auxiliaries (n=2); Extractions (n=2)
ComparisonNo treatment, delayed treatment, placebo, or another active interventionNo active treatment (n=17); Minor interceptive procedures (n=1); Conventional brackets (n=5); Nickel-titanium archwires (n=3); Fixed appliances only (n=3); Passive self-ligating brackets (n=2); Multistranded stainless steel archwires (n=2); Stainless steel archwires (n=2)
OutcomesPrimary: Amount of crowding (mm or any index of malocclusion). Secondary: Size of the upper jaw (arch length); Size of the lower jaw (arch length); Upper incisors to maxilla; Lower incisors to mandible; Lower molars to mandible; Time to alignment; Time for ligation; Self-esteem; Participant satisfaction; Jaw joint problems. Other: Harms (health of the gums; damage to the teeth; pain including use of analgesia)Amount of crowding (n=24); Arch length (n=7); Time to alignment (n=8); Ligation time (n=1); Upper incisors to maxilla (n=3); Lower incisors to mandible (n=6); Lower molars to mandible (n=2); Harms (n=6)
Study designsRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) of orthodontic treatments to prevent or correct crowded teeth, comparing one intervention to placebo, no intervention or another crowding methodRandomised controlled trials (n=24)
TimingClinically important outcomes recorded at the most common endpoints reported for all ages19 different time points recorded across studies, from pre-treatment to 13-year follow-up

Search date: 2021-01. Databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE Ovid; Embase Ovid

Questions and results

Current version only

Lower lip bumper vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Lower incisors to mandible at 6 months
6 months
MD 3.14 [1.73, 4.55]1 study · 34 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (change in mandibular incisor crowding) at 6 months
6 months
MD -4.39 [-5.07, -3.71]
-4.39 [-5.07, -3.71] mm
1 study · 34 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length) at 6 months
6 months
MD 3.34 [2.71, 3.97]1 study · 34 participantsUngraded
Lower molars to mandible at 6 months
6 months
MD -0.91 [-1.58, -0.24]1 study · 34 participantsUngraded

Cervical pull headgear vs Minor interceptive procedures (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Size of the jaws (maxillary and mandibular arch length)
2 to 8 years
MD 1.98 [1.80, 2.16]1 study · 64 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 2 years
2 years
MD 0.33 [-0.60, 1.26]
0.33 [-0.60, 1.26] mm
1 study · 64 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Upper incisors to maxilla at 2 years
2 years
MD 4.5 [1.36, 7.64]1 study · 64 participantsUngraded
Lower incisors to mandible at 2 years
2 years
MD 1.4 [-0.42, 3.22]1 study · 64 participantsUngraded

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length) at 1 year
1 year
MD 2.61 [1.83, 3.39]1 study · 30 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding
1 year
SoF1: Amount of crowding - Not measured. The single study (Rebellato 1997) did not report the amount of crowding for this comparison.1 studyUngraded
Lower incisors to mandible at 1 year
1 year
MD 3.01 [1.71, 4.31]1 study · 30 participantsUngraded
Lower molars to mandible at 1 year
1 year
MD -1.11 [-1.51, -0.71]1 study · 30 participantsUngraded

Self-ligating brackets vs Conventional brackets

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 5 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees)
post-treatment
MD 1.29 [-1.77, 4.35]1 study · 33 participantsUngraded
Time to alignment (days)
alignment
MD 89.64 [-45.89, 225.17]2 studies · 148 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding) at 10 weeks
10 weeks
MD -0.40 [-0.93, 0.13]
-0.40 [-0.93, 0.13] mm
1 study · 60 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Time for ligation (seconds, to ligate six brackets)
during treatment
MD -78.8 [-81.86, -75.74]1 study · 60 participantsUngraded
Harms (discomfort, periodontal/gingival health, root resorption)
up to 9 months
No evidence of differences between self-ligating and conventional brackets for discomfort (Atik 2014, Miles 2010), plaque/gingival index and probing depth (Atik 2014), or maxillary incisor root resorption (Aras 2018).…3 studiesUngraded

Active self-ligating brackets vs Passive self-ligating brackets

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Time to alignment (days)
alignment
MD -13.11 [-28.76, 2.53]2 studies · 144 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (upper anterior crowding)
baseline
Only baseline upper anterior crowding reported (Pandis 2010a, n=70); evidence of baseline imbalance between groups (P=0.04); no post-treatment between-group crowding estimate reported.1 studyUngraded

Copper nickel-titanium archwire vs Nickel-titanium archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (Little's Irregularity Index) at 12 weeks
12 weeks
MD 0.49 [0.35, 0.63]
0.49 [0.35, 0.63] mm
1 study · 66 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Harms (discomfort)
after archwire change
No difference in overall discomfort levels between copper NiTi and NiTi archwire sequences (Ong 2011, 7-point Likert). Narrative; no pooled estimate.1 studyUngraded
Time to alignment (days)
alignment
MD -2.63 [-14.50, 9.24]2 studies · 191 participantsUngraded

Coaxial nickel-titanium archwire vs Nickel-titanium archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of tooth movement / reduction in crowding at 12 weeks
12 weeks
MD 6.77 [5.55, 7.99]
6.77 [5.55, 7.99] mm
1 study · 24 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Nitinol archwire vs Titinol archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (change) up to 37 weeks
up to 37 weeks
MD -0.28 [-0.89, 0.33]
-0.28 [-0.89, 0.33] mm
1 study · 40 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Nickel-titanium archwire vs Multistranded stainless steel archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Harms (pain)
first days
No difference in overall pain, but more pain with nickel-titanium at 12 hours and day 1 (morning, afternoon, bedtime) vs multistranded stainless steel (Sandhu 2013). Narrative; no pooled estimate.1 studyUngraded
Amount of crowding (change in mandibular crowding) at 8 weeks
8 weeks
MD 1.60 [-22.16, 25.36]
1.60 [-22.16, 25.36] mm
1 study · 25 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Nickel-titanium archwire vs Stainless steel archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (change in mandibular crowding) at 8 weeks
8 weeks
MD -16.80 [-42.79, 9.19]
-16.80 [-42.79, 9.19] mm
1 study · 24 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Multistranded stainless steel archwire vs Stainless steel archwire

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (change in mandibular crowding) at 8 weeks
8 weeks
MD -18.40 [-47.12, 10.32]
-18.40 [-47.12, 10.32] mm
1 study · 23 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Lacebacks with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances only (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Size of the lower jaw (arch length)
6 months
MD 0.83 [-6.41, 8.07]1 study · 62 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (change) at 6 months
6 months
MD -0.33 [-5.90, 5.24]
-0.33 [-5.90, 5.24] mm
1 study · 62 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Vibrational appliance with fixed appliances vs Fixed appliances only / no vibrational appliance (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Harms (discomfort, pain intensity, analgesia use)
first week
No clear difference in discomfort/pain intensity or analgesia consumption between vibrational appliance and control (Miles 2012, Miles 2016, Woodhouse 2015; 100 mm VAS). Narrative; no pooled estimate.2 studiesUngraded
Amount of crowding (change in mandibular crowding) at 10 to 30 weeks
10 to 30 weeks
MD 0.24 [-0.81, 1.30]
0.24 [-0.81, 1.30] mm
2 studies · 119 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Time to alignment (days)
alignment
MD -3.70 [-26.29, 18.89]2 studiesUngraded
Harms (orthodontically-induced inflammatory root resorption)
end of alignment
Using a vibrational appliance did not affect amount of root resorption vs control (Woodhouse 2015; 72 participants analysed). Narrative; no pooled estimate.1 study · 72 participantsUngraded

Schwarz appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 4 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Upper incisors to maxilla (inclination, degrees) at 9 months
9 months
MD 0.33 [-2.26, 2.92]1 study · 28 participantsUngraded
Size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length, change) at 9 months
9 months
MD 0.11 [-0.46, 0.68]1 study · 28 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (lower arch crowding, change) at 9 months
9 months (after 6 months treatment)
MD -2.14 [-2.79, -1.49]
-2.14 [-2.79, -1.49] mm
1 study · 28 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Lower incisors to mandible (position, mm) at 9 months
9 months
MD 0.39 [0.11, 0.67]1 study · 28 participantsUngraded

Eruption guidance appliance vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 1 question
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (number of children with crowding, mandible) after 1 year
1 year
OR 0.19 [0.05, 0.68]
14 out of 22 children (control) vs 6 out of 24 children (experimental)
1 study · 46 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision

Extraction of lower deciduous canines vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Lower incisors to mandible (inclination, degrees) at 1 year
1 year
MD 0.08 [-0.55, 0.71]1 study · 83 participantsUngraded
Amount of crowding (lower incisor crowding, change) at 1-2 years
1 to 2 years
MD -4.76 [-6.24, -3.28]
-4.76 [-6.24, -3.28] mm
1 study · 83 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change) at 1 year
1 year
MD -2.73 [-3.69, -1.77]1 study · 83 participantsUngraded

Extraction of third molars (wisdom teeth) vs No active treatment (control)

Population: Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth
CD003453.PUB2 (current) · 2 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Amount of crowding (Little's Irregularity Index, change) at 5 years
5 years
MD -0.30 [-1.30, 0.70]
-0.30 [-1.30, 0.70] mm
1 study · 77 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision
Size of the lower jaw (arch length, change)
5 years
MD 1.03 [0.56, 1.50]1 study · 77 participantsUngraded

Orthodontic treatment (any: removable, fixed or functional braces, head-braces, or extractions) vs No treatment / delayed treatment / another active intervention

Population: Children and/or adolescents (aged 16 years or less) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct or prevent crowding
CD003453 · 8 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Self-esteem
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Jaw joint problems (temporomandibular)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Damage to the teeth (e.g. tooth decay)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Lower molars to mandible (relationship of lower back teeth to the mandible)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Amount of crowding (mm or index of malocclusion)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Lower incisors to mandible (relationship of lower front teeth to the mandible)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Patient satisfaction
no estimate extractedNRNo studies
Health of the gums (gingivae)
no estimate extractedNRNo studies