ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Assessment of Orthodontic Retention Protocols and their Effects on Treatment Stability.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2024. 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.
- Post-treatment stability after insertion of CAD/CAM fabricated or Conventional fixed orthodontic retainers: a two-year follow-up.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Orthodontic retention protocols are crucial for maintaining treatment stability post-orthodontic treatment. However, the optimal retention strategy remains debated. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patient records from a tertiary orthodontic center over 5 years was conducted. Variables, including retention protocols employed, duration of retention, and treatment stability, were weighed. Results: Fixed retainers were the most commonly utilized retention protocol, followed by removable retainers and combination methods. Although the incidence of treatment relapse appeared higher among patients with removable retainers, the difference did not reach statistical significance. Combination protocols demonstrated comparable treatment stability to fixed retainers. Conclusion: This research gives understanding of the effectiveness of orthodontic retention protocols in a tertiary center setting. While fixed retainers remain widely used, removable retainers and combination methods also show promise in maintaining treatment stability. Addressing patient compliance issues and optimizing retention strategies based on individual patient needs are essential for enhancing treatment outcomes.
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.