ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2022
Quality of orthodontic care-A multicenter cohort study in Germany : Part 1: Evaluation of effectiveness of orthodontic treatments and predictive factors.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized controlled trial comparing AI-assisted digital and conventional orthodontics: Superior PAR reduction and occlusal outcomes.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Dentofacial changes following four premolar extraction camouflage treatment in Class III malocclusions: a retrospective cohort study with gender-based evaluation.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Apical root resorption in Class III patients following pronounced mandibular incisor retraction with lingual high precision fixed appliances: a retrospective cohort study.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- Quality of orthodontic care-A multicenter cohort study in a German convenience sample : Part 2: Cross-sectional patient-reported outcomes after orthodontic treatment.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025Article
- Dentoalveolar process remodelling in the anterior mandible after Class III camouflage treatment with lower premolar extractions.Head & face medicine · 2025Article
- Novel concept for posterior crossbite correction : Preliminary results.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025Article
- Early orthodontic treatment need over a 10-year period and evaluation of short-term intervention stability.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Quality of occlusal outcome in adult Class II patients treated with completely customized lingual appliances and Class II elastics compared to adult Class I patients.European journal of orthodontics · 2024Article
- Quality of occlusal outcome in adult class II patients after maxillary total arch distalization with interradicular mini-screws.Head & face medicine · 2024Article
- Factors influencing treatment outcomes assessed by the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System (ABO-OGS).BMC oral health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsOrthodontic care and its effectiveness have increasingly become the focus of political and public attention in the recent past. Therefore, this multicenter cohort study aimed to report about the effectiveness of orthodontic treatments in Germany and to identify potential influencing factors.
methodsA total of 586 patients from seven German study centers were screened for this cohort study, of which 361 patients were recruited at the end of their orthodontic treatment. Of these, 26 patients had missing study models and/or missing treatment information. Thus, 335 participants were included. The severity of malocclusion was rated using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index at baseline (T0) retrospectively and-prospectively-after the retention period (T1). Practitioner-, treatment- and patient-related information were analyzed in order to detect potential predictive factors for treatment effectiveness.
resultsStudy participants (202 female and 133 male) were on average 14.8 (standard deviation [SD] ± 6.1) years old at start of active treatment. Average PAR score at T0 was 25.96 (SD ± 10.75) and mean posttreatment PAR score was 3.67 (SD ± 2.98) at T1. An average decrease of total PAR score by 22.30 points (SD ± 10.73) or 83.54% (SD ± 14.58; p < 0.001) was detected. Furthermore, 164 treatments (49.1%) were categorized as 'greatly improved' but only 3 treatments (0.9%) as 'worse or no different'; 81.5% of all cases finished with a high-quality treatment outcome (≤5 PAR points at T1). Logistic regression analyses detected staff experience as a significant predictive factor for high-quality results (odds ratio 1.27, p = 0.001, 95% confidence interval 1.11-1.46).
conclusionThe improvement rate among this selected German cohort indicated an overall very good standard of orthodontic treatment. Staff experience proved to be a predictive factor for high-quality results.
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.