ArticleProgress in orthodontics2025
Adolescents' adherence to intraoral removable appliances: a scoping review.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdolescents' lack of adherence to intra-oral removable appliances (IORAs) can lead to poor treatment outcomes. Available literature on this topic hasn't been comprehensively summarized. Existing reviews often combine data from various age groups, lack a standardized conceptual definition of adherence to IORAs, and offer limited evaluation of interventions aimed at improving adherence among adolescents. This scoping review aims to map the breadth and depth of the literature on adolescents' adherence to IORAs and identify research gaps for developing tailored interventions.
methodsIn accordance with Arksey and O'Malley's framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a comprehensive search strategy was implemented across MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ProQuest Theses and Dissertations. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts. A pilot-tested form facilitated data extraction. Risk of bias was evaluated using RoB 2, ROBINS-I, and JBI tools. Extracted data then underwent both descriptive and content analysis.
resultsThe 14 included studies focused on adherence to wear-time recommendations (n = 13), with only one examining appointment adherence. Only seven studies (50%) were deemed high-quality. Adherence rates varied across IORAs: vacuum-formed retainers showed wear-time of less than 24 h/day, Hawley retainers averaged 12-15 h/day, Twin Blocks averaged 21 h/day, and Activators averaged 11.5 h/day. Studies pursued various aims: four explored patient perspectives and experiences; one assessed designed interventions; two evaluated treatment adherence and assessed adherence to both recommendations and appointments; and five identified associated factors. Several studies pursued multiple aims. Patient perspectives highlighted challenges like discomfort and social pressures, and enablers such as parental support. Limited intervention studies indicated potential benefits of digital and image-based monitoring. Adherence consistently fell short of recommended daily wear time (DWT), often influenced by motivation, parental involvement, and psychosocial factors.
conclusionAdherence among adolescents to the DWT for intraoral removable appliances is frequently suboptimal, displaying considerable variability depending on appliance type. Both individual and social determinants influence adherence. Robust study designs and a standardized conceptualization of adherence are imperative to generate high-quality, comparable evidence. Evidence-based interventions must be developed and tested to enhance adherence and ultimately optimize treatment outcomes within this patient population.
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.