Trial reportDental press journal of orthodontics2019
Periodontal parameters of two types of 3 x 3 orthodontic retainer: a longitudinal study.
Trial report in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05250765 (Comparison of Efficiency and Effectiveness of Two Types of Bonded Orthodontic Retainers), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Comparison of Efficiency and Effectiveness of Two Types of Bonded Orthodontic Retainers: an RCT.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Retention procedures for stabilising tooth position after treatment with orthodontic braces.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Periodontal indexes of two types of 3 x 3 retainers: 0.032-in SS V-loop versus 0.0215-in SS coaxial - a randomized crossover trial.Dental press journal of orthodontics · 2024Trial
- Evaluation of Orthodontic Retention Protocols and Their Impact on Treatment Stability: Insights from a Tertiary Care Study.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
- Fixed and removable orthodontic retainers, effects on periodontal health compared: A systematic review.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionbonded fixed retainers are often used to stabilize the results obtained with the orthodontic treatment. It is important that they do not prejudice dental health, as they will be used for a long period.
objectiveThe purpose of the present study was to compare periodontal indexes between two types of bonded fixed retainers, conventional 3 x 3 plain retainer (0.8-mm orthodontic wire, bonded to the canines only) and a manufactured braided retainer (0.2 x 0.7-mm stainless steel wire, bonded to all anterior teeth) after use.
methodsa test group of 15 volunteers (aged from 18 to 25 years) used both the conventional retainer and braided retainer for six months. A randomized longitudinal study design, with a two week washout interval, was applied. The dental plaque index, gingival index and dental calculus index were evaluated. Furthermore, the calculus accumulated along the retainer wire was measured and all patients answered a questionnaire about the use, acceptance and comfort of both types of retainers.
resultsthe scores for plaque and gingival indexes were higher for the braided retainer (p< 0.05) on the lingual and proximal surfaces. The same occurred with the calculus index on the lingual surfaces (p< 0.05). The calculus index along wire was higher for the braided retainer (p< 0.05). All patients preferred the conventional retainer, and said that it was also more comfortable to use.
conclusionit was concluded that the conventional retainer showed better periodontal indexes than the braided type.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.