AlMogbel AbdulMajeed, Alshawy Ebrahim S, Alhusainy Abdulmageed
Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Conservative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Qassim University, Buraydah 52571, Saudi Arabia.
J Orthod Sci. 2024 May 8;13:23. doi: 10.4103/jos.jos_176_23. eCollection 2024.
The purpose of the current systematic review was to answer the clinical research question "Is Clear Aligner Therapy (CAT) effective in controlling the orthodontic movement?" by bringing together the most up-to-date information about the available evidence for CAT.
On January 1, 2023, a search was conducted in PubMed, ERIC, Embase, and CINHAL for any research papers published in the previous 10 years that provided an overview of the PICO questions. Both the titles and abstracts of the selected studies were evaluated independently by two different authors, and if there was any disagreement between the two review authors, a third reviewer was brought in to settle it.
Among included studies, three were retrospective non-randomized and two studies were prospective randomized clinical trials. Various authors reported better outcome for fixed orthodontic appliances than for clear aligner treatment (CAT) in relation to mandibular incisor proclination. The mean objective grading system score was better for braces (17) than for CAT (12) with no clinically significant difference, while staging had a significant impact on treatment efficacy.
The results of this study suggest that clear aligners may be an effective alternative to traditional braces, but more research is needed to confirm these findings and determine the optimal size of future prospective studies evaluating this treatment.
本系统评价的目的是通过汇总关于可摘矫治器治疗(CAT)现有证据的最新信息,回答临床研究问题“可摘矫治器治疗(CAT)在控制正畸移动方面是否有效?”
2023年1月1日,在PubMed、ERIC、Embase和CINHAL中检索过去10年发表的任何提供PICO问题概述的研究论文。所选研究的标题和摘要由两位不同的作者独立评估,如果两位综述作者之间存在任何分歧,则引入第三位评审员来解决。
在纳入的研究中,三项为回顾性非随机研究,两项为前瞻性随机临床试验。关于下颌切牙前倾,不同作者报告固定正畸矫治器的效果优于可摘矫治器治疗(CAT)。平均客观评分系统得分,矫治器(17分)优于可摘矫治器治疗(CAT)(12分),但无临床显著差异,而分期对治疗效果有显著影响。
本研究结果表明,可摘矫治器可能是传统矫治器的有效替代方案,但需要更多研究来证实这些发现,并确定未来评估该治疗方法的前瞻性研究的最佳规模。