Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37824794›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of orthodontics2023

The prevalence of the failure of fixed orthodontic bonded retainers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Su Thae Aye, Shiyao Liu, Emer Byrne, Ahmed El-Angbawi

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of orthodontics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Finite Element Analysis of Fixed Orthodontic Retainers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Su Thae AyeDivision of Dentistry, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
Shiyao LiuDivision of Dentistry, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
Emer ByrneUniversity Dental Hospital of Manchester, MFT NHS Trust, UK.
Ahmed El-AngbawiDivision of Dentistry, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, UK.
University of Manchester · GBUniversity Dental Hospital of Manchester · GB

Funding

University of Manchester
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo systematically assess the scientific literature for the prevalence of failure rate of fixed orthodontic bonded retainer (FOBR).

methodRandomized clinical trials (RCTs) and prospective non-RCTs involving participants who had FOBR fitted were included. The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of science, MEDLINE, and EMBASE via OVID were searched from inception to January 2023. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 and Newcastle-Ottawa tools. The main outcome was the failure rate of FOBRs. The secondary outcome was to identify factors that can influence the failure of FOBR. Meta-analyses and sensitivity analyses were undertaken using Revman, version5.4. A random-effects model was used. Quality assessment using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

resultsThirty-four studies (25 RCTs and 9 prospective clinical studies) (3484 participants) were included in this review. The overall failure rate of bonded retainers, after excluding high-risk studies, was 35.22% (95% confidence interval [CI] 27.46-42.98). The failure rate is increased with the duration of follow up; with short-term follow-up rate 24.18% (95% CI 20.16-28.21), medium-term follow up 40.09% (95% CI 30.92-49.26), and long-term follow up 53.85% (95% CI 40.31-67.39). There is a low level of evidence to suggest there is no statistically significant difference in the failure rate of fixed retainers using direct versus indirect bonding methods, using liquid resin versus without liquid resin, and fibre-reinforced composite retainers compared to multi-stranded stainless steel retainers. DISCUSSION: There is low-quality evidence to suggest that the failure rate of FOBR is relatively high. There is a need for high-quality, well-reported clinical studies to assess factors that can influence the failure rate of FOBR. REGISTRATION: CRD42021190910.

Indexed as

Orthodontic Appliances, FixedOrthodontic RetainersHumansPrevalenceProspective StudiesStainless SteelStainless Steel

Identifiers

PMID37824794
PMCPMC10687514
OpenAlexW4387568901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.