ArticleContemporary clinical dentistry
Effect of Two Different Penetration Depths of Micro-osteoperforation on the Rate of Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Prospective Clinical Study.
Article in Contemporary clinical dentistry. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: The objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of two different penetration depths of micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement over 60 days. In addition, the amount of pain and discomfort caused by the MOP was evaluated. Materials and Methods: A total of 22 patients (18-30 years) who need fixed orthodontic treatment were recruited and randomly assigned into two groups. Randomization for determination of the experimental side and depth of perforations was done using sealed envelopes. On each patient, the other side of the mouth worked as control side with no MOPs. Patients in group 1 (MOP-5) received 3MOPs on the buccal surface of the alveolar bone each at 5 mm depth, whereas patients in group 2 (MOP-7) received 3MOPs on the buccal surface of the alveolar bone each at 7 mm depth. The amount of canine retraction was measured every 30 days at two intervals on both sides of the mouth. Pain perception was measured after 1 h, 24 h, 72 h, 7 days, and 28 days of procedure. MOP-related pain was measured using a visual analog scale. The level of statistical significance was Results: The result of the intra-examiner reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient more than 0.97 ( Conclusion: Three MOPs with a depth of 5 mm can be performed as an effective method to increase the rate of tooth movement. However, increasing the depth of perforation beyond 5 mm does not additionally enhance tooth movement.
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.