Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39055972›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Patient Satisfaction Following Orthodontic Treatment: A Systematic Review.

Abdulmalek M H Almasri, Mohammad Y Hajeer, Mowaffak A Ajaj, Alaa Oudah Ali Almusawi, Samer T Jaber, Ahmad Salim Zakaria, Mohammad Khursheed Alam

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Abdulmalek M H AlmasriDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Mohammad Y HajeerDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Mowaffak A AjajDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Damascus, Damascus, SYR.
Alaa Oudah Ali AlmusawiDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Al-Knooz, Basrah, IRQ.
Samer T JaberDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Al-Wataniya Private University, Hama, SYR.
Ahmad Salim ZakariaDepartment of Orthodontics, School of Dental Sciences, University Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, MYS.
Mohammad Khursheed AlamDepartment of Preventive Dental Science, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, SAU.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become increasingly important in orthodontic treatment as they reflect patients' perceptions of treatment outcomes. Understanding patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is crucial for improving healthcare delivery and patient-centered care. This systematic review aimed to critically appraise the evidence regarding patient satisfaction after orthodontic treatment, exploring the effects of different treatment types, patient demographics, and other factors on satisfaction levels. Eight electronic bibliographic databases were searched without publication time or language restrictions, including PubMed®, Scopus®, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science™, Embase®, Google™ Scholar, Trip, and OpenGrey. A manual search was conducted on the references in the included papers. Eligibility criteria were established based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) framework. Studies were included if they reported patient satisfaction levels following orthodontic treatment using standardized questionnaires. Two reviewers independently collected and analyzed the data. The risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB2) for randomized clinical trials, and the methodologic quality for cohort and cross-sectional studies was assessed using the modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fourteen studies employed various questionnaires and timings to gauge post-orthodontic treatment satisfaction. Patient satisfaction levels were generally high, with most studies reporting satisfaction rates above 91%. Fixed orthodontic appliances were associated with higher satisfaction levels compared to removable appliances. While age and gender did not significantly influence satisfaction, the quality of care and doctor-patient relationships were crucial factors in patient satisfaction. This systematic review proves that patient satisfaction with orthodontic treatment is generally high, with fixed appliances and positive doctor-patient relationships contributing to higher satisfaction levels. However, the quality of the evidence was moderate to low, highlighting the need for further high-quality clinical studies in this area.

Indexed as

fixed appliancesorthodontic treatmentpatient-centered carepatient-reported outcome measurespatients’ satisfactionremovable appliances

Identifiers

PMID39055972
PMCPMC11271306

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.