ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2022
Evaluation of relapse with thermoplastic retainers equipped with microsensors.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of predictive factors for post-orthodontic stability: a retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Is wear time of Hawley retainers measured with microsensors related to mandibular arch stability?Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025Article
- Smart Flexible 3D Sensor for Monitoring Orthodontics Forces: Prototype Design and Proof of Principle Experiment.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
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 examine relapse with thermoplastic retainers equipped with microsensors 1 year after treatment. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 42 patients (29 females, 13 males) treated with four premolar extractions were included in this study. Thermoplastic appliances equipped with TheraMon microsensors (Handelsagentur Gschladt, Hargelsberg, Austria) were used to assess daily wear time (DWT), and the patients were monitored at 2-month intervals for a period of 12 months. At the end of the follow-up, the following two groups were formed based on the mean DWT: short wear time (SWT; <9 h/d) and long wear time (LWT; ≥9 h/d). Digital models were constructed before treatment (T0), at debonding (T1), and 6 months (T2) and 12 months (T3) after debonding. Little's Irregularity Index (LII) and the intercanine and intermolar widths, arch lengths, overjet, and overbite were calculated based on the digital models. Data were analyzed statistically.
resultsIrregularity and overjet increased, whereas transverse measurements and arch lengths decreased with time in both groups. During the retention period, overbite decreased in the SWT group but increased in the LWT group. There were significant differences between groups only in mandibular irregularity. The LII values of the SWT group were significantly higher than those of the LWT group for the T1-T2 and T1-T3 time intervals (P < .05).
conclusionsA mean DWT less than 9 hours/day was inadequate for controlling irregularity within clinically acceptable limits. A wear time of at least 9 h/d is recommended for the maintenance of mandibular anterior alignment.
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.