ReviewCureus2024
Evaluation of Satisfaction Levels Following Orthognathic Treatment in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effect of dexmedetomidine on perioperative events of orthognathic surgery: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2025Pooled it
- Effects of Prediabetes on Bone Metabolism and Healing in Orthognathic Surgery: A Narrative Review.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Long-term patient satisfaction and complication rates after orthognathic surgery: a minimum 3-year follow-up study.Oral and maxillofacial surgery · 2026Article
- Patient satisfaction following orthodontic treatment and its association with ABO Model Grading System: a cross-sectional study.BMC oral health · 2026Observational
- Article
- Synergistic Triad of Mixed Reality, 3D Printing, and Navigation in Complex Craniomaxillofacial Reconstruction.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Aesthetic Impact of Orthognathic Surgery vs. Orthodontic Camouflage in Class II Division 1 Patients with Convex Facial Profile: A Follow-Up Using Combined Frontal and Profile Views.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of Post-Operative Neurosensory Deficiency Following Le Fort I Maxillary Osteotomy and Its Impact on Patient Satisfaction: A Retrospective Clinical Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Role of initial facial attractiveness in the perceived aesthetic outcome of convex profile treatment.PeerJ · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dentofacial deformities can significantly impact an individual's quality of life, affecting facial aesthetics, self-esteem, and overall well-being. The combined orthognathic surgery-orthodontic treatment is the preferred approach for correcting moderate-to-severe deformities. However, patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgery remains a crucial outcome measure, influenced by various factors, including the type of malocclusion, surgical procedure, and demographic characteristics. This systematic review aimed to synthesize the available evidence regarding patient satisfaction following orthognathic surgery, exploring the effects of the type of malocclusion, surgical procedure, age, and gender on satisfaction rates, addressing a gap left by previous outdated reviews. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed®, Scopus®, Web of Science™, and Embase®. Eligibility criteria were defined using the PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design) framework. Cochrane's ROBINS-I (Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions) tool was employed for non-randomized intervention studies within clinical controlled trials to assess the risk of bias. In parallel, a revised version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale determined the methodological quality of cohort and cross-sectional studies. Sixteen studies were analyzed, revealing satisfaction levels ranging from 83% to 100%. Findings indicate that class III malocclusion patients report higher satisfaction than class II patients and satisfaction varies based on surgical type, with bimaxillary procedures generally yielding better outcomes. While most studies found no significant correlation between satisfaction and demographic factors such as age and gender, some suggested younger patients may express higher satisfaction and that female patients might report lower satisfaction levels. The review highlights the importance of effective patient communication and expectation management in achieving optimal satisfaction outcomes in orthognathic surgery. Limitations such as memory bias and methodological diversity across studies restrict the ability to perform meta-analyses, underscoring the need for further research in this area.
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.