Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42037004›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthodontics2026

Cost-effectiveness of interceptive orthodontics: a long-term evaluation of early treatment strategies.

Sara Björns, Klara Leffler, Thomas Davidson, Anna Westerlund

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Sara BjörnsDepartment of Cariology, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 450, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
Klara LefflerDepartment of Mathematical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 5, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas DavidsonDepartment of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, 581 83 Linköping, Sweden.
Anna WesterlundDepartment of Orthodontics, Institute of Odontology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Box 450, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2438-8516

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesMalocclusions occur at high frequencies in children and adolescents. While early orthodontic (interceptive) interventions may reduce the need for later comprehensive treatment, their cost-effectiveness in publicly funded health systems is unclear. This study compares the cost-effectiveness of interceptive orthodontic care and fixed-appliance therapy, focusing on total costs, treatment outcomes, and resource use.

methodsA decision tree model was developed using observational data on treatment success rates, duration, and appointments to estimate resource use and costs for interceptive orthodontic care; Fixed Appliance therapy was modeled as an optimal 2-year treatment pathway. A health-care payer perspective was applied. Incremental costs and effects were calculated for four interceptive modalities: Quad Helix, Extraoral Traction (EOT), Removable Plates, and Activator appliances, as compared to fixed appliance therapy. Minimum required success rates were estimated for achieving cost-neutrality. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (10 000 Monte Carlo simulations) and scenario analyses assessed the robustness of the results.

resultsAll the interceptive treatments demonstrated lower expected costs than the fixed appliance therapy, albeit with lower clinical effectiveness. Quad Helix exceeded the minimum required success rate 20% points, representing a clear margin of cost-effectiveness. Removable Plates also exceeded the minimum required success rate, but with a smaller margin of 6% points. The Activator and EOT appliances were more dependent on patient compliance and failed to meet the minimum required success rate, requiring increases of 13% and 10% points, respectively, to achieve cost-neutrality. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these patterns and underscored the importance of long-term treatment stability. LIMITATIONS: The model assumed a 100% success rate for fixed appliances and relied on expert opinion for long-term stability parameters, given the limited availability of relapse data.

conclusionsIn the publicly funded dental care context studied, the use of Quad Helix and removable plates in publicly funded health-care systems appears to be cost-effective. Activator and EOT appliances should be used selectively. The study also contributes a transparent, adaptable modeling framework that can incorporate locally relevant costs and future long-term outcome data, supporting use in other publicly funded settings.

Indexed as

MalocclusionOrthodontics, InterceptiveActivator AppliancesAdolescentChildCost-Benefit AnalysisCost-Effectiveness AnalysisDecision TreesExtraoral Traction AppliancesHealth Care CostsHumansMonte Carlo MethodOrthodontic Appliance DesignOrthodontic Appliances, FixedOrthodontic Appliances, RemovableTreatment Outcomedental appliancehealth economics modelinginterceptive careorthodontics

Identifiers

PMID42037004
PMCPMC13111488

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.