Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32435862›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2020

Angle class II correction: stepwise mandibular advancement or bite jumping? : A systematic review and meta-analysis of skeletal, dental and condylar effects.

Michael Knösel, Gerardo Enrique Espinoza-Espinoza, Paulo Sandoval-Vidal, Carlos Zaror

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael KnöselDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de La Frontera (UFRO), Temuco, Chile. mknoesel@yahoo.de.
Gerardo Enrique Espinoza-EspinozaCenter for Research in Epidemiology, Economics and Oral Public Health (CIEESPO), Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile. gerardo.espinoza@ufrontera.cl.
Paulo Sandoval-VidalDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de La Frontera (UFRO), Temuco, Chile.
Carlos ZarorDepartment of Paediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de La Frontera (UFRO), Temuco, Chile.
Universidad de La Frontera · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThere is no consensus regarding which mode of activation or mandibular advancement (stepwise [SW] or maximum bite-jumping [BJ]) of fixed or removable functional appliances (FFA; RFA) for correction of Angle class II malocclusion is advantageous to produce dental, skeletal or condylar effects and has the lowest rate of undesired dental or technical side-effects.

methodsA systematic search was conducted up to Oct. 20, 2019 in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Central Cochrane Library, and BBO databases. Included were preadolescent, adolescent, and adult humans with initial (pretreatment) Angle class II malocclusion, without further restriction. The intervention group was composed of subjects treated with FFA or RFA in SW mandibular advancement; the control group received BJ advancement. Search terms included prospective randomized and nonrandomized trials in English, German, Spanish, and Portuguese with the primary outcomes of skeletal and dental class II correction, effects on condylar growth, lower incisor proclination, overjet and overbite reduction. The risk of bias (ROB) was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's ROB2 tool. Mean differences were calculated and pooled by a meta-analysis using a random effects model.

resultsData from five randomized controlled trials (RCT) with 401 participants (mean age 13.84 years; SD 1.53) were included; 331 derived from four studies were included in the meta-analysis. The ROB in the selected articles was high. We detected a slightly increased reduction of the ANB (mean difference [MD] -0.95°, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.80 to -0.10°; I

conclusionThere is weak evidence indicating a slightly increased reduction of the ANB and less lower incisor proclination with SW advancement compared to BJ, but the clinical relevance is debatable due to the small overall magnitude and small number of high-quality papers. REGISTRATION: Prospero #CRD42017075469 (www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero).

Indexed as

Malocclusion, Angle Class IIOrthodontic Appliances, FunctionalOverbiteAdolescentAdultCephalometryHumansMandibleMandibular AdvancementOrthodontics, CorrectiveFixed functional appliancesHerbst applianceIncremental bite advancementMandibleRemovable functional appliances

Identifiers

PMID32435862
OpenAlexW3027516539

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.