Summary of findings 5. Late treatment (one‐phase in adolescence): comparison among different types of appliances used for treatment of prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion).
| Late treatment in adolescence (one‐phase): comparison among different types of appliances used for treatment of prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) | ||||||
|
Patient or population: adolescents (age between 12 and 16 years) receiving orthodontic treatment to correct prominent upper front teeth Intervention: Removable funtional appliance Comparison: Fixed funtional appliance | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Number of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Fixed functional appliance | Removable functional appliance | |||||
| Overjet (mm) (smaller value better) Follow‐up at end of orthodontic treatment |
Mean final overjet ranged from 0.95 mm to 3.53 mm | Mean final overjet was 0.74 mm higher (0.15 lower to 1.33 higher) | 154 (2) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1 2 | ||
| Incidence of Incisal trauma | Not measured | |||||
| ANB (°) Follow‐up at end of orthodontic treatment |
Mean final ANB ranged from 4.40° to 5.88° | Mean final ANB was 1.04° lower (1.6 lower to 0.49 lower) | 185 (3) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low3 4 | ||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI) CI: Confidence interval; MD: Mean difference | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect Moderate quality: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different Low quality: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect Very low quality: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect | ||||||
1 Downgraded due to inconsistency (interventions were not similar between studies)
2 Downgraded twice as both studies were at high risk of bias
3 Downgraded due to inconsistency (interventions were not similar between studies)
4 Downgraded twice as 3 trials were at high risk of bias