Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32147751›Full record

Trial reportProgress in orthodontics2020

Effect of mini-screw-facilitated micro-osteoperforation on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: a single-center, split-mouth, randomized, controlled trial.

Neda Babanouri, Shabnam Ajami, Parisa Salehi

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Progress in orthodontics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Effect of micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) on the rate of en masse orthodontic tooth retraction : A randomized controlled trial.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2024
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Research progress in periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2024
    Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Neda BabanouriOrthodontic Research Center, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Qom Abad, Ghasrodasht St, Shiraz, 713451836, Iran.
Shabnam AjamiOrthodontic Research Center, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Qom Abad, Ghasrodasht St, Shiraz, 713451836, Iran. dr.ajami.sh@gmail.com.
Parisa SalehiOrthodontic Research Center, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Qom Abad, Ghasrodasht St, Shiraz, 713451836, Iran.
Shiraz University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

Vice-Chancellor for Research, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (IR) 15681
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe present study aimed to evaluate the effect of MOP over a 3-month period and to determine the influence of the number of perforations on the rate of canine retraction. In addition, the amount of pain and discomfort caused by the MOP method was evaluated. TRIAL

designA single-center, split-mouth, triple-blind, randomized, controlled trial was conducted.

methodsThe clinical trial was conducted from December 2018 to July 2019 in the Orthodontic Clinic, Shiraz Dental School. Twenty-eight patients (range from16.3 to 35.2 years) who need fixed orthodontic treatment were recruited and randomly assigned to MOP1 and MOP2 groups. In each patient one side of the mouth worked as a control side which received no MOPs. Four months after first premolars extraction, patients in MOP1 group received 3 MOPs on the buccal surface of alveolar bone in the experimental side to accelerate canine retraction whereas patients in MOP2 group received 3 buccal MOPs and 3 palatal MOPs in the experimental side. The amount of canine retraction was measured every 28 days at three intervals on both sides of the mouth. Pain perception was also measured on the day of MOP procedure and subsequently at 24 h. Randomization was performed using online software RANDOM.ORG; the recruited patients were divided into two parallel groups with a 1:1 allocation ratio then the side of MOPs intervention in each subject was randomly determined with coin tossing. Triple blinding design was employed.

resultsThe result of the intra-examiner reliability using ICC was 0.97 (P <  0.001), indicating excellent repeatability and reliability of the measurements. The baseline characteristics between the groups were similar (P > 0.05). There was a significant difference in the rate of canine retraction between the MOP groups and the contralateral control sides, as well as between the MOP1 and MOP2 groups (P <  0.05).

conclusionThe MOP procedure was effective in accelerating orthodontic tooth movement, although the amount of acceleration was not clinically significant in the case of canine retraction. An increase in the number of MOPs resulted in a significant acceleration of the canine retraction.

trial registrationThe trial was registered 30 November 2018 at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT20181121041713N1).

Indexed as

MouthTooth Movement TechniquesBone ScrewsHumansIranReproducibility of ResultsMicro-osteoperforationRate of orthodontic tooth movementRegional acceleratory phenomenon

Identifiers

PMID32147751
PMCPMC7061095
OpenAlexW3011328787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.