SynthesisJournal of oral rehabilitation2026
Clear Aligners and Bruxism: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBruxism is a masticatory muscle activity that may occur during sleep (SB) or wakefulness (AB) and is not classified as a movement or sleep disorder. Clear aligner therapy, widely adopted as a removable and aesthetic orthodontic alternative, modifies occlusal contacts and mandibular dynamics, which may influence the occurrence or perception of bruxism behaviours.
objectiveTo systematically review the association between clear aligner therapy and bruxism (SB, AW and mixed/self-reported), with a focus on evaluating its role as neutral, protective or a potential risk factor.
methodsA systematic search of electronic databases and grey literature was conducted through April 2025, with included studies that identified bruxism using validated instrumental methods (portable electromyography for SB, or smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment for AB), subjective questionnaires on behaviours and related symptoms. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and evidence quality was evaluated with GRADE.
resultsEleven studies evaluated 818 patients (72.8% female). Most studies suggested a neutral effect of clear aligners on bruxism. For SB, aligners often reduced tonic contractions but showed inconsistent effects on higher phasic activity and no changes on overall SB index. AB was generally unaffected, though one study reported reduced self-reported parafunctions with altered muscle recruitment. Mixed/self-reported bruxism outcomes were conflicting: some studies indicated improvements in clenching and TMJ pain, while others found a higher prevalence of bruxism symptoms during aligner therapy. Methodological heterogeneity and risk of bias were notable, precluding that no meta-analysis was possible. GRADE certainty for randomised studies was moderate and very low for non-randomised studies.
conclusionCurrent evidence on the relationship between clear aligner therapy and bruxism remains limited and heterogeneous. Most studies suggest a neutral effect, with occasional reductions in tonic contractions or symptom improvement, but also reports of increased phasic activity or self-reported bruxism. Overall, aligners cannot yet be classified as protective or harmful, highlighting the need for standardised, high-quality studies to clarify their role in bruxism management.
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.