Faculty of Dentistry, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.
Faculty of Dentistry, University of Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia.
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2020 Jun;20(2):101402. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2020.101402. Epub 2020 Jan 29.
New methodological approaches, such as the umbrella review, constitute an important pathway for synthesizing the scientific evidence provided from studies with a high level of evidence. This study aims to summarize the results on the effectiveness of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) and the factors that contribute to their success or failure during orthodontic treatment in patients of different age groups and to identify the gaps in knowledge based on analysis of the scientific literature.
An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses was performed. A quality evaluation and a descriptive analysis of the included studies were conducted. The study protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42018094463).
Seventeen systematic reviews and meta-analyses were considered (10 descriptive and 7 with meta-analysis; 12 of high quality and 5 of moderate quality). Variability was observed in the type of intervention and the type of system (TADs). Most of the studies reported high success rates (≥90%), and just one systematic review indicated a low rate of success (≤56%) for the mini-screws. All the studies discussed several factors related to the success of the TADs. These factors were classified as device-related factors, patient-related factors, procedure-related factors, and orthodontic treatment-related factors. Conceptual and methodological gaps were observed when considering the data analysis, the terminology used, and the orthodontic protocols.
The results should be analysed cautiously because of several research gaps related to the methodological quality and the high heterogeneity of the original studies and because of the necessity to add several clinical and sociodemographic variables to enrich the data analysis.
新的方法学方法,如伞式综述,为综合具有高证据水平的研究提供的科学证据提供了一条重要途径。本研究旨在总结在不同年龄组患者的正畸治疗中,临时锚定装置(TAD)的有效性及其成功或失败的因素,并根据对科学文献的分析,确定知识空白。
对系统评价和荟萃分析进行伞式综述。对纳入研究进行质量评估和描述性分析。该研究方案已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(PROSPERO:CRD42018094463)注册。
共考虑了 17 项系统评价和荟萃分析(10 项描述性和 7 项具有荟萃分析;12 项高质量和 5 项中等质量)。干预类型和系统类型(TADs)存在差异。大多数研究报告了高成功率(≥90%),只有一项系统评价报告了微型螺钉的成功率较低(≤56%)。所有研究都讨论了与 TADs 成功相关的几个因素。这些因素被归类为与器械相关的因素、与患者相关的因素、与操作相关的因素和与正畸治疗相关的因素。在考虑数据分析、使用的术语和正畸方案时,观察到概念和方法上的差距。
由于与方法学质量相关的几个研究空白以及原始研究的高度异质性,以及需要添加几个临床和社会人口统计学变量来丰富数据分析,因此应谨慎分析结果。