ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2021
Evaluation of self-perceived pain and jaw function impairment in children undergoing slow and rapid maxillary expansion.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06877780 (Patient-reported Outcome Measures of Two Different Treatment Protocols to Manage Growing Patients With Skeletal Class III and Maxillary Constriction), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Patient-reported Outcome Measures of Two Different Treatment Protocols to Manage Growing Patients With Skeletal Class III and Maxillary Constriction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of rapid versus slow maxillary expansion on patient-reported outcome measures in growing patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Progress in orthodontics · 2022Pooled it
- The effectiveness of orthodontic treatment with clear aligners in different thicknesses.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Posterior crossbite corrections in the early mixed dentition with quad helix or rapid maxillary expander: a cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized controlled trial.European journal of orthodontics · 2024Trial
- Pain and discomfort during the first week of maxillary expansion using two different expanders: patient-reported outcomes in a randomized controlled trial.European journal of orthodontics · 2023Trial
- Auditory-Perceptual and Acoustic Characteristics of Sibilant and Vowel Sounds in Children with Cleft Palate Undergoing Rapid Palatal Expansion.Folia phoniatrica et logopaedica : official organ of the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (IALP) · 2026Article
- Short-Term Impact of Slow Maxillary Expansion on Labial Ectopic Canine Eruption Pathway in Children: A Retrospective Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Do patient-reported outcomes of miniscrew-supported maxillary expansion in adolescent patients differ between slow and rapid activation protocol?Evidence-based dentistry · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate and compare perceived pain and jaw function impairment during the first 4 weeks with slow maxillary expansion (SME) using quadhelix and rapid maxillary expansion (RME) using conventional banded hyrax. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty patients aged 10.2 to 15 years were enrolled and consecutively recruited to either the quadhelix group (QG) or hyrax group (HG). A questionnaire was used to evaluate pain, jaw function impairment, and analgesic consumption in the first 7 days, at 2 weeks, and at 4 weeks.
resultsFifty-five patients (43 girls and 12 boys) completed the questionnaire at all time points (27 in the QG and 28 in the HG). Except at 4 hours, there were no significant differences between the groups regarding pain from teeth, tongue, and palate. Patients started to adapt after day 3. Patients in the HG group reported significantly higher scores for difficulty in swallowing (moderate to severe) during the first 6 days. In both groups, minimal effects were found on speech and the majority of patients did not experience difficulty in yawning or laughing. There was no significant difference in analgesic consumption between the groups. No correlations were found between age, gender, or malocclusion type and any of the investigated outcomes.
conclusionsQuadhelix for SME and conventional banded hyrax for RME were well tolerated by patients after 1 week. The decision to use either appliance could be based on factors not related to patient experiences.
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.