BACKGROUND: There is a lack of attention to screw placement techniques for surgical treatment of scoliosis in children and adolescents. This meta-analysis aims to compare the accuracy and safety of pedicle screw placement between the 3D-printed navigation template technique and the freehand technique during corrective surgery for scoliosis in children and adolescents. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted for relevant articles up to December 2021 in databases including PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Web of Science. The systematic meta-analysis compared the efficacy of pedicle screw placement between the two techniques, including accuracy of pedicle screw placement, complication rate, operation time, blood loss, mean placement time per screw, and mean times for fluoroscopy. RESULTS: The seven articles analyzed in this study involved 229 patients altogether. A total of 2,805 pedicle screws were placed by the two methods. Our results revealed that the 3D-printed guide template technique was more accurate than the freehand technique in pedicle screw placement (odds ratio [OR] =2.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.24-3.91; < 0.000) with a lower complication rate (OR = 0.21; 95% CI: 0.06-0.78;  = 0.02). The operation time (mean difference [MD] = -34.37; 95% CI: -67.47 to -1.28;  = 0.04) and mean placement time per screw (MD = -3.11; 95% CI: -6.13 to -0.09;  = 0.04) and mean times for fluoroscopy (MD = -6.60; 95% CI: -8.66 to -4.55;  < 0.000) significantly decreased among patients in the 3D-printed navigation template group compared with those in the freehand technique group. In addition, the two techniques had no significant statistical difference in blood loss. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the traditional freehand technique, the 3D-printed guide template is a promising technique with higher accuracy and safety in screw placement for surgical treatment of scoliosis in children and adolescents, and is worth popularizing and validating through more prospective clinical studies.