Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28753032›Full record

Trial reportThe Angle orthodontist2017

Discomfort associated with Invisalign and traditional brackets: A randomized, prospective trial.

David W White, Katie C Julien, Helder Jacob, Phillip M Campbell, Peter H Buschang

3 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Angle orthodontist, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 3 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 99 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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.

NCT05361616 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Impact of Photobiomodulation on Pain During Orthodontic Treatment

TypeinterventionalSponsorPBM Healing International LimitedRan2023 to 2025Enrolled32ConditionsMalocclusion, Orthodontic TreatmentArmsPBM Ortho
NCT06218641 nawithdrawnnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of Discomfort Perceived by a Cohort of Patients Treated With Aligners and Attachments Placed According to Two Different Protocols. Single-blind Randomised Controlled Pilot Clinical Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCSRan2023 to 2024Enrolled0ConditionsMalocclusionArmsCP - conventional protocol, DP - delayed protocol
NCT06536335 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of the Perceived Experience of Patients Treated With Aligners With Two Different Attachment Placement Times: Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCSRan2024 to 2025Enrolled24ConditionsMalocclusionArmsBiomax Nuvola aligners
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

99 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

David W White
Katie C Julien
Helder Jacob
Phillip M Campbell
Peter H Buschang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate differences in discomfort levels between patients treated with aligners and traditional fixed orthodontic appliances. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis blinded, prospective, randomized equivalence two-arm parallel trial allocated 41 adult Class I nonextraction patients to either traditional fixed appliance (6 males and 12 females) or aligner (11 males and 12 females) treatment. Patients completed daily discomfort diaries following their initial treatment appointment, after 1 month and after 2 months. They recorded their levels of discomfort at rest, while chewing, and while biting, as well as their analgesic consumption and sleep disturbances.

resultsBoth treatment modalities demonstrated similar levels of initial discomfort. There were no significant sex differences. Patients in the traditional fixed appliances group reported significantly (P < .05) greater discomfort than patients in the aligner group during the first week of active treatment. There was significantly more discomfort while chewing than when at rest. Traditional patients also reported significantly more discomfort than aligner patients after the first and second monthly adjustment appointments. Discomfort after the subsequent adjustments was consistently lower than after the initial bonding or aligner delivery appointments. A higher percentage of patients in the fixed-appliance group reported taking analgesics during the first week for dental pain, but only the difference on day 2 was statistically significant.

conclusionsPatients treated with traditional fixed appliances reported greater discomfort and consumed more analgesics than patients treated with aligners. This trial was not registered.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleOrthodontic Appliance DesignOrthodontic BracketsPainProspective StudiesSingle-Blind MethodTime FactorsDiscomfortInvisalignPainTraditional brackets

Identifiers

PMID28753032
PMCPMC8317568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.