ArticleProgress in orthodontics2025
Patient experiences and discomfort associated with mid-palatal temporary skeletal anchorage devices.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Failure rates of 958 interradicular mini-screws for maxillary total arch distalization following a well-established insertion protocol.European journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- Assessing the relationship between mini-screw implant shape and primary stability: An experimental study in orthodontics.Journal of orthodontic science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMid-palatal placement of temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs) has become increasingly popular among clinicians due to high success rates, low associated risk and streamlining and enhanced customization of associated supra-structures. There is however limited patient data in relation to associated experiences and impacts.
methodsA survey of patients undergoing mid-palatal TSAD insertion was undertaken using a 27-item bespoke questionnaire. Questionnaires were sent using both electronic and surface mail with a 3-month period allowed for response. Pain experience; the use of analgesia; requirement for additional visits; impacts on hygiene, speech, eating, and hobbies; and social impacts were assessed. Reponses involved the use of a Visual Analogue Scale as well as binary information.
resultsOverall, 152 responses were obtained with 87.5% describing experience of TSAD insertion either "as expected" or "better". Procedural pain was reported as mild in 62.5%. Local post-operative pain was scored as moderate in 21.1%. Some functional impairment was reported with 63.2% attributing difficulty with speech and 67.8% difficulty with eating due to the implant. However, these functional impairments were generally considered mild (by 68.1% and 60.2%, respectively) and most were very likely to recommend this treatment to others, with 65.1% (n = 99) scoring 8 or above out of 10.
conclusionsAppreciable levels of pain, discomfort and functional impairment were noted with the use of mid-palatal TSADs. However, any unpleasant experiences were generally regarded as mild with most highly likely to recommend mid-palatal TSADs to prospective patients.
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.