ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2022
Implications of pretreatment incisor inclinations for the achievement of cephalometric normal values-a study on two patient collectives.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective was to clarify whether standardized multibracket therapies-differing only in finishing-wire dimensions (0.016 × 0.022 inch vs. 0.017 × 0.025 inch CNA [Connecticut New Archwire]) and excluding any extraction treatment or additional appliances other than intermaxillary elastics-can produce normal incisor inclinations starting from different baseline inclinations.
methodsWe analyzed pre- and posttreatment cephalograms of 156 patients (age: 15.6 ± 1.3 years) treated with Roth system (0.018 inch slot). Each archwire group (n = 89 or 67) was divided into subjects with initially retroclined, orthograde, or proclined upper and/or lower incisors (U1, L1). For the resultant 12 subgroups, descriptive statistics were compiled relative to five reference planes (NL, ML, NA, NB, BOP), followed by multiple intragroup (Kolmogoroff-Smirnoff and Wilcoxon signed-rank test) and intergroup (Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U test) comparisons relative to NL or ML.
resultsThe following intra- (1, 2) and intergroup (3, 4) differences were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) in both archwire groups: (1) post- vs. pretreatment inclinations in the subgroups initially retroclined U1, retroclined L1 and orthograde U1, but without normal values being achieved (subgroups retroclined U1, L1) or preserved (subgroup orthograde U1); (2) observed vs. expected alterations for the subgroups initially orthograde and proclined U1 and L1; (3) posttreatment inclinations for the subgroups initially retroclined vs. orthograde L1 and proclined L1; (4) observed alterations for the subgroups initially retroclined vs. proclined U1 and L1, but neither retroclined nor proclined vs. orthograde. Archwire thickness influenced the outcome to only a limited extent under the special circumstances of this study.
conclusionThe bracket/archwire combinations evaluated did not lead to normal incisor inclinations in most cases. Posttreatment values did significantly depend on the pretreatment situation. Most frequently, alterations were protrusive in direction, which notably even included incisors that showed norm values at the outset of treatment. It can be concluded that bracket torque will influence but not dominate incisor inclinations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34232329What 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.