Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33822027›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthodontics2021

The impact of force magnitude on the first and second maxillary molars in cervical headgear therapy.

Tuula Talvitie, Mika Helminen, Susanna Karsila, Reeta Varho, Luca Signorelli, Pertti Pirttiniemi, Timo Peltomäki

Open access · hybridAbstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthodontics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. [Early orthodontic/orthopedic treatment in patients with class II sagittal anomalies. A review].Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)
    Review
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Tuula TalvitieOral Diseases, The Hospital District of South Ostrobothnia, Seinäjoki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-2992-3784
Mika HelminenTays Research Services, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Susanna KarsilaDental Teaching Unit, Turku Municipal Health Care Services, Turku, Finland.
Reeta VarhoDental Teaching Unit, Turku Municipal Health Care Services, Turku, Finland.
Luca SignorelliPrivate practice, Wil, Switzerland.
Pertti PirttiniemiDepartment of Oral Development and Orthodontics, Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, University of Oulu, Finland and Medical Research Center, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Timo PeltomäkiInstitute of Dentistry, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Tampere University · FITurku City Hospital · FIOulu University Hospital · FISeinäjoki University of Applied Sciences · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo study the effect of force magnitude on the maxillary first and second molars in cervical headgear (CHG) therapy. MATERIAL AND

methodsIn this controlled clinical trial, patients (n = 40) were treated with CHG with a light (L, 300 g, n = 22) or a heavy force (H, 500 g, n = 18) magnitude. The subjects were asked to wear CHG for 10 hours a day for 10 months. The outer bow of the CHG facebow was lifted up for 10-20 degrees and the inner bow was expanded 3-4 mm. Adherence to instructions and force magnitude were monitored using an electronic module (Smartgear, Swissorthodontics, Switzerland). Panoramic and lateral radiographs before (T1) and after treatment (T2) were analysed using a Romexis Cephalometric module (Planmeca, Finland) focussing on the angular, sagittal, and vertical positions of the permanent first and second molars.

resultsAccording to the cephalometric analysis of the maxillary first and second molars, distal tipping occurred during T1-T2 in the H group (P = 0.010 and 0.000, respectively), and the change was greater in the H group compared to the L group (P = 0.045 and 0.019, respectively). Based on the panoramic analysis, tipping occurred in the distal direction during therapy in the H group in the second molars compared to the midline or condylar line (P = 0.001 and 0.001; P = 0.008 and 0.003 on the right and left, respectively).

conclusionWith heavy force magnitude, the maxillary first and second molars can tilt more easily in the distal direction even if the CHG was used less. Distal tipping of the molar can be considered to be a side effect of CHG therapy.

Indexed as

Malocclusion, Angle Class IICephalometryExtraoral Traction AppliancesHumansMaxillaMolarTooth Movement Techniques

Identifiers

PMID33822027
PMCPMC10084717
OpenAlexW3150308101

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.