ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2025
Changes in the distribution of occlusal forces in the course of the orthodontic retention phase : A prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2025. 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.
- Digital Analysis of Occlusal Contacts in Angle Class II and Class III Malocclusion.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAim of the present study was to assess the relative distribution of occlusal forces after orthodontic treatment and during the first 3 months of the retention phase using a computerized occlusal analysis system (T-Scan, Tekscan Inc., Norwood, MA, USA). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 52 patients were included in this prospective cohort study and underwent analysis of occlusal forces on the level of tooth, jaw-half, and -quadrant during a 3-month period. Furthermore, differences between three retention protocols (group I: removable appliances in both jaws; group II: fixed 3-3 lingual retainers in both jaws; group III: removable appliance in the maxilla and fixed 3-3 lingual retainer in mandible) were assessed with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests at 5%.
resultsDirectly after debonding, measured forces distribution were similar to published references for untreated samples. In the following, no significant difference was found between retention protocols II and III with regard to the asymmetry of the anterior occlusal forces. Both groups maintained an asymmetric force distribution in the anterior segment during the study period. There was also no difference between groups II and III in the distribution of occlusal forces for the posterior segments. Both retention concepts kept the symmetrical distribution of occlusal forces stable over the observation period. The retention concept of group I demonstrated a symmetrical distribution of occlusal forces in the anterior segment after debonding and this remained stable during the 3‑month period. In the posterior segment, no improvement of the initially asymmetric masticatory force distribution could be observed.
conclusionsAll three studied retention protocols showed stability in retaining their original symmetrical or asymmetrical occlusal force distribution posteriorly/anteriorly during the 3‑month observation period. Therefore, an even distribution of occlusal forces should be the aim of the finishing phase, as no relative benefit of any single retention scheme in terms of post-debond improvement during the retention phase was seen.
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.