Primary study · included by 1 review
Treatment effects of intrusion arches and mini-implant systems in deepbite patients.
Senisik 2012 · Senışık Neslihan Ebru, Türkkahraman Hakan · American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2012
Included by
| Outcome this study informs | Pooled effect | Evidence | Certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Amount of incisor intrusion Maxillary incisor intrusion with temporary anchorage devices (TADs/mini-implants) vs Connecticut intrusion arch (CTA) | SMD -1.02 [-1.79, -0.24] | 3 studies · 92 participants | GRADE not reported |
Treatment duration Maxillary incisor intrusion with temporary anchorage devices (TADs/mini-implants) vs Connecticut intrusion arch (CTA) | MD -0.13 [-0.64, 0.38] | 2 studies · 66 participants | Very low |
Amount of incisor intrusion Maxillary incisor intrusion with temporary anchorage devices (TADs/mini-implants) vs Connecticut intrusion arch (CTA) | SMD -0.88 [-1.35, -0.42] | 5 studies · 136 participants | Low |
Overbite correction Maxillary incisor intrusion with temporary anchorage devices (TADs/mini-implants) vs Connecticut intrusion arch (CTA) | SMD -0.48 [-1.02, 0.06] | 4 studies · 96 participants | Low |
1 including review in total.