Trial reportProgress in orthodontics2024
Patient-reported outcomes during accelerating the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth using low-intensity electrical stimulation: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Progress in orthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
Evaluation of Patient-reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) During Accelerating the En-masse Retraction of Upper Anterior Teeth Using a Low-intensity Direct Electrical Current: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
Patient-reported Outcomes of Accelerated Upper Canine Retraction With Low-amperage Electrical Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Low-Intensity Electrical Stimulation on External Apical Root Resorption and Periodontal Indices Following En-Masse Retraction of Upper Anterior Teeth in Young Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Clinical and experimental dental research · 2025Trial
- Article
- Review
- Early Physiotherapy of Post-Surgical Scars Using a Topical Cannabidiol (VeroDol CBD) Cream Gel: Three Case Reports.Journal of cosmetic dermatology · 2026Article
- Acupressure versus paracetamol for short-term orthodontic pain: A randomized clinical trial.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Effectiveness of Surgical and Non-Surgical Techniques for Accelerating Orthodontic Tooth Movement in Fixed Appliances and Aligners: A Systematic Review.Turkish journal of orthodontics · 2025Article
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLow-intensity electrical stimulation (LIES) is considered a relatively recent technology that has received little attention in orthodontics as a method of acceleration. This study aimed to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures when LIES is used to accelerate the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe sample consisted of 40 patients (8 males, 32 females; mean age 21.1 ± 2.3 years), with Class II division I malocclusion who required extraction of the first premolars to retract upper anterior teeth. They were randomly assigned to the LIES group (n = 20) and the conventional en-masse retraction group (CER; n = 20). Patient responses regarding pain, discomfort, burning sensation, swelling, chewing difficulty, speech difficulty, and painkillers' consumption were recorded at these nine assessment times: 24 h (T1), 3 days (T2), and 7 days (T3) after force application, then in the second month after 24 h (T4), 3 days (T5), and 7 days (T6) of force re-activation, and finally after 24 h (T7), 3 days (T8), and 7 days (T9) of force re-activation in the third month.
resultsThe mean values of pain perception were smaller in the LIES group than those in the CER group at all assessment times with no statistically significant differences between the two groups except during the second and third months (T5, T6, T8, and T9; P < 0.005). However, discomfort mean values were greater in the LIES group with significant differences compared to CER group during the first week of the follow-up only (T1, T2, and T3; P < 0.005). Burning sensation levels were very mild in the LIES group, with significant differences between the two groups at T1 and T2 only (P < 0.001). Speech difficulty was significantly greater in the LIES group compared to CER group at all studied times (P < 0.001). High levels of satisfaction and acceptance were reported in both groups, without any significant difference.
conclusionBoth the LIES-based acceleration of en-masse retraction of upper anterior teeth and the conventional retraction were accompanied by mild to moderate pain, discomfort, and chewing difficulty on the first day of retraction. These sensations gradually decreased and almost disappeared over a week after force application or re-activation.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05920525. Registered 17 June 2023 - retrospectively registered, http://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05920525?term=NCT05920525&rank=1 .
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.