Observational studyActa odontologica Scandinavica2025
Effect of different fixed lingual retainers on tooth mobility: prospective clinical study.
Observational study in Acta odontologica Scandinavica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06284499 (Effect of Different Fixed Lingual Retainers on Tooth Stability), which is not on this 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.
Effect of Different Fixed Lingual Retainers on Tooth Stability
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
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the effects of different fixed lingual retainers (LRs) on tooth mobility after orthodontic treatment at the 10-month follow-up. Methods: 72 patients were allocated to three different LR groups (Ortho FlexTech® chain, Bond-A-Braid®, Penta-One®). Additionally, 20 non-treated people were included as a control group. The mobility of six mandibular anterior teeth was measured using a Periotest® device at each time points (before application of LR [T0], immediately after application of LR [T1] and 10 months after [T2] the application of the LR), and at only one time (T0) for the control group.
resultsThe mobility value was significantly lower at T1 and T2 compared to that at T0 (P < 0.05); yet, there were no differences at T1 and T2 in all LR groups (P > 0.05). No significant differences in mobility between the T0-T1, T0-T2, and T1-T2 time points were observed across the LR groups (P > 0.05). The mobility of teeth 33 and 43 decreased over time across all study groups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Mobility decreased immediately after LR application, but did not change during the 10-month follow-up in the treatment groups. The observed decrease in mobility of canines over time, in contrast to other teeth, suggests a relationship between root size and mobility.
trial registrationThe current clinical trial was recorded at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT06284499, 08/02/2024, retrospectively registered.
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.