Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40369515›Full record

Trial reportBMC oral health2025

Predictability of maxillary canine retraction comparing power arm and non-power arm using 24 sets of In-house clear aligner in premolar extraction case: a randomized controlled trial.

Sawitt Eurutairat, Natnicha Vongtiang, Sakda Wonghinkong, Somchai Manopatanakul, Peerapong Santiwong, Nita Viwattanatipa

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. [Advancements in biomechanics and orthodontic strategies for clear aligner therapy].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

6 authors.

Sawitt EurutairatCandidate Master's Degree in Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Natnicha VongtiangPrivate practice, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sakda WonghinkongCandidate Residency Training in Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Somchai ManopatanakulPrivate practice, Bangkok, Thailand.
Peerapong SantiwongDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nita ViwattanatipaDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. nitaviw@hotmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe bowing effect observed during premolar extractions presents a challenge in clear aligner therapy. This study aims to investigate the accuracy of maxillary tooth movement in first premolar extraction cases using the in-house clear aligner (IHCA), comparing the palatal power arm (PA) and non-power arm (control / C).

methodsEighteen adults requiring maxillary first premolars extraction using IHCA were recruited. Using a randomized controlled trial with a split-mouth design, each patient received treatment for both PA and C. Data at the 24th IHCA comprising virtual-power arm (VPa), virtual-control (VC), actual-power arm (APa) and actual-control (AC) were measured by superimposition with pretreatment digital model, using 3D GOM Inspect software. Six types of tooth movement were assessed. Paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the differences between groups. Root mean square error (RMSE) as predictability was computed.

resultsFor the maxillary canine, there was no significant difference between the PA and C groups for all types of tooth movement except rotation. Specifically, the PA exhibited a significantly less difference in distal-in rotation compared to the control group (APa-VPa -3.54°/AC-VC -11.57°). Similarly, the RMSE of PA demonstrated better accuracy in rotation than the control (PA 7.85°/control 15.98°). In terms of anchorage, the RMSE of PA indicated greater deviation than the control in the second premolar mesial-in rotation and crown-tipping. Regarding the first molar, the RMSE of PA was mostly similar to that of the control.

conclusionIHCA can effectively retract maxillary canines in cases involving premolar extraction. However, although palatal power arms improve the accuracy of canine rotation, no notable benefits are seen for other types of tooth movement or for anchorage control.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN14020146 of the International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial. The date of registration was 16/11/2022. The trial was retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

BicuspidCuspidOrthodontic Appliance DesignTooth ExtractionTooth Movement TechniquesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMaxillaYoung AdultAccuracyIn-house clear alignerPower armPremolar extractionRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID40369515
PMCPMC12079856

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.