Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26313228›Full record

SynthesisThe Angle orthodontist2016

Patient satisfaction after orthodontic treatment combined with orthognathic surgery: A systematic review.

Camila Pachêco-Pereira, Lucas G Abreu, Bruce D Dick, Graziela De Luca Canto, Saul M Paiva, Carlos Flores-Mir

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Angle orthodontist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evaluation of effectiveness and stability of aligner treatments using the Peer Assessment Rating Index.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2021
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Camila Pachêco-Pereiraa  Assistant Clinical Professor, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Lucas G Abreub  PhD student, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Bruce D Dickc  Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine and Department of Psychiatry & Pediatrics, and Chief of Psychology, Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Graziela De Luca Cantod  Associate Professor, Department of Dentistry, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianopolis, Brazil, and Adjunct Professor, Department of Dentistry School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Saul M Paivae  Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Carlos Flores-Mirf  Professor and Division Head of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo synthesize available evidence about factors associated with patients' satisfaction after orthodontic treatment combined with orthognathic surgery. MATERIALS AND

methodsStudies that evaluated any factor associated with patients' satisfaction after the conclusion of an orthodontic treatment combined with an orthognathic surgery were identified. Orthognathic surgical procedures should have been undertaken after completion of craniofacial growth. Any satisfaction psychometric tool was considered. No language limitation was set. A detailed individual search strategy for each of the following bibliographic databases was crafted: MEDLINE, PubMed, EBM Reviews, Web of Science, EMBASE, LILACS, and Scopus. The references cited in the identified articles were also cross-checked, and a partial gray-literature search was undertaken using Google Scholar.

resultsEight articles satisfied the inclusion criteria of this systematic review and accounted for 998 patients. The included studies showed large variation in sample size (range  =  44 to 505 patients), age (range  =  15 to 72 years old), distinct psychological evaluation tools, and time elapsed between the assessment and the completion of surgery and postorthodontic treatment. Most of the studies (five of eight) were classified as having high risk of bias.

conclusionFactors associated with satisfaction were final esthetic outcome, perceived social benefits from the outcome, type of orthognathic surgery, sex, and changes in patient self-concept during treatment. Factors associated with dissatisfaction were treatment length; sensation of functional impairment and/or dysfunction after surgery, and perceived omitted information about surgical risks.

Indexed as

Orthognathic SurgeryPatient SatisfactionEsthetics, DentalHumansOrthodontics, CorrectiveTreatment OutcomeCombined orthodonticsOrthodonticOrthognathicPatient satisfactionSatisfaction

Identifiers

PMID26313228
PMCPMC8601732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.