The effectiveness of bone anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP) in the management of class III skeletal malocclusion in children aged 11-14 years compared with an untreated control group: A multicentre two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of bone anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP) in the management of class III skeletal malocclusion in children aged 11-14 years compared with an untreated control group in terms of perceived need for orthognathic surgery, skeletal and dental change, and psychological impact. DESIGN: A multicentre two-armed parallel randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Six UK hospital orthodontic units. METHODS: A total of 57 patients were randomly allocated into either the BAMP group (BAMPG) (n = 28) or a no treatment control group (CG) (n = 29). OUTCOMES: Data collection occurred at registration (DC1),18 months (DC2) and 3 years (DC3), where skeletal and dental changes were measured from lateral cephalograms and study models. Oral Aesthetic Subjective Impact Score (OASIS) and Oral Quality of Life (OHQOL) questionnaires were used to assess the psychological impact of treatment. RESULTS: The mean age was 12.9 ± 0.7 years and 12.6 ± 0.9 years in the BAMPG and CG, respectively. At DC2, the BAMPG achieved a class III ANB improvement of +0.6° compared with -0.7° in the CG (P = 0.004). The overjet improvement was +1.4 mm for the BAMPG and -0.2 mm for the CG (P = 0.002). There was no evidence of any other group differences for the other skeletal or dental cephalometric outcomes (P > 0.05) or the questionnaire data (OASIS P = 0.10, OHQOL P = 0.75). At DC2, the 18-month follow-up, 22% of the BAMPG achieved a positive overjet. At the 3-year follow-up (DC3), fewer patients in the BAMPG were perceived to need orthognathic surgery (48%) compared with 75% of patients in the CG (P = 0.04), with an odds ratio of 0.31 (95% confidence interval = 0.10-0.95). CONCLUSION: The BAMP technique did not show any social or psychological benefits; however, the skeletal class III improvement in ANB and the overjet change were sufficient to reduce the perceived need for orthognathic surgery by 27% compared with the CG.

Providing multimedia information to children and young people increases recruitment to trials: pre-planned meta-analysis of SWATs.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials are often beset by problems with poor recruitment and retention. Information to support decisions on trial participation is usually provided as printed participant information sheets (PIS), which are often long, technical, and unappealing. Multimedia information (MMI), including animations and videos, may be a valuable alternative or complement to a PIS. The Trials Engagement in Children and Adolescents (TRECA) study compared MMI to PIS to investigate the effects on participant recruitment, retention, and quality of decision-making. METHODS: We undertook six SWATs (Study Within A Trial) within a series of host trials recruiting children and young people. Potential participants in the host trials were randomly allocated to receive MMI-only, PIS-only, or combined MMI + PIS. We recorded the rates of recruitment and retention (varying between 6 and 26 weeks post-randomisation) in each host trial. Potential participants approached about each host trial were asked to complete a nine-item Decision-Making Questionnaire (DMQ) to indicate their evaluation of the information and their reasons for participation/non-participation. Odds ratios were calculated and combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Data from 3/6 SWATs for which it was possible were combined in a meta-analysis (n = 1758). Potential participants allocated to MMI-only were more likely to be recruited to the host trial than those allocated to PIS-only (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.05, 2.28; p = 0.03). Those allocated to combined MMI + PIS compared to PIS-only were no more likely to be recruited to the host trial (OR = 0.89; 95% CI 0.53, 1.50; p = 0.67). Providing MMI rather than PIS did not impact on DMQ scores. Once children and young people had been recruited to host trials, their trial retention rates did not differ according to intervention allocation. CONCLUSIONS: Providing MMI-only increased the trial recruitment rate compared to PIS-only but did not affect DMQ scores. Combined MMI + PIS instead of PIS had no effect on recruitment or retention. MMIs are a useful tool for trial recruitment in children and young people, and they could reduce trial recruitment periods.

The effect of treatment timing on clinical and psychological outcomes with Twin Block therapy: A multicentre two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether delaying treatment with a twin block appliance affects treatment outcomes, in terms of skeletal and dental change and psychological disadvantage. DESIGN: Multicentre, two-arm parallel randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Three UK hospital orthodontic units. METHODS: A total of 75 participants were randomly allocated into an Immediate Treatment Group (ITG) (n= 41) and an 18-month delayed Later Treatment Group (LTG) (n=34). OUTCOMES: Dentofacial changes were recorded from lateral cephalograms and study models, psychological impact was measured using a child perception questionnaire (CPQ11-14) and an Oral Aesthetic Subjective Impact Score (OASIS) at registration (DC1), 18 months (DC2) and 3 years (DC3). RESULTS: The ITG initial effect was a mean ANB reduction was 1.6° (P<0.001) (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.89-2.29), and an overjet reduction of 5.06 mm (P<0.001) (95% CI = 3.96-6.16) (boys: aged 12 years 8 months; girls: aged 11 years 8 months). There were no statistically significant differences between the ITG and LTG for twin block treatment outcomes, but the ITG active treatment time was longer (P=0.004) (ITG: 13.1 months; LTG: 9.8 months). There was insufficient evidence to state that patients were psychologically disadvantaged by waiting 18 months for active twin block treatment (P>0.05). CONCLUSION: Participants achieved similar clinical and psychological outcomes irrespective of whether they started their twin block at the age of referral (ITG) or 18 months later (LTG). This suggests that boys aged 12 years 8 months and girls aged 11 years 8 months, on average, are not disadvantaged by waiting 18 months for active twin block treatment.

Evaluating the use of multimedia information when recruiting adolescents to orthodontics research: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare two methods of providing information about the Bone Anchored Maxillary Protraction (BAMP) trial: standard printed information and multimedia websites, for their quality and ease of understanding, and impact on decision-making. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Orthodontic outpatient clinic in the UK. METHODS: Participants were 109 adolescents (aged 11-14 years) attending for orthodontic treatment. While awaiting treatment they were asked to imagine being recruited to the BAMP clinical trial. They were individually randomised to receive the printed or the multimedia website information (comprising text, animations and 'talking head' videos). After reading or viewing the information, they completed a 9-item Likert scale Decision-Making Questionnaire (DMQ) (score range 0-36) plus three free-text questions on their evaluation of the information. RESULTS: A total of 104 participants completed the questionnaire. Mean total DMQ scores were higher (more positive) in the website group (28.1 vs. 27.0), although the difference was small and not statistically significant (P = 0.20). Analysis of individual questionnaire items showed two statistically significant differences: the website information had higher ratings on 'easy to understand' (Z = 3.03; P = 0.003) and 'confidence in decision-making' (Z = 2.00; P = 0.044). On the three free-text questions, more positive and fewer negative comments were made about the websites than the printed information. CONCLUSION: In this hypothetical trial setting, adolescent patients found that trial information conveyed on a multimedia website was easier to understand and made them more confident in their decision about trial participation. Their subjective evaluations of the website were also more positive and less negative than about the printed information. Multimedia information has the potential to increase the quality of engagement and information exchange when seeking consent for research.

Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets.

BACKGROUND: Bonding of orthodontic brackets to teeth is important to enable effective and efficient treatment with fixed appliances. The problem is bracket failure during treatment which increases operator chairside time and lengthens treatment time. A prolonged treatment is likely to increase the oral health risks of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances one of which is irreversible enamel decalcification. This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2003. A new full search was conducted on 26 September 2017 but no new studies were identified. We have only updated the search methods section in this new version. The conclusions of this Cochrane Review remain the same. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of different orthodontic adhesives for bonding. SEARCH METHODS: Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 26 September 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 8) in the Cochrane Library (searched 26 September 2017), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 26 September 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 26 September 2017). The US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing two different adhesive groups. Participants were patients with fixed orthodontic appliances. The interventions were adhesives that bonded stainless steel brackets to all teeth except the molars. The primary outcome was debond or bracket failure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were recorded on decalcification as a secondary outcome, if present. Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were extracted in duplicate by pairs of review authors. Since the data were not presented in a form that was amenable to meta-analysis, the results of the review are presented in narrative form only. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials satisfied the inclusion criteria. A chemical cured composite was compared with a light cured composite (one trial), a conventional glass ionomer cement (one trial) and a polyacid-modified resin composite (compomer) (one trial). The quality of the trial reports was generally poor. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear evidence on which to make a clinical decision of the type of orthodontic adhesive to use.

Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment.

BACKGROUND: Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. The success of a fixed appliance depends partly on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being glued to the teeth so that they do not become detached during treatment. Brackets (metal squares) are usually attached to teeth other than molars, where bands (metal rings that go round each tooth) are more commonly used. Orthodontic tubes (stainless steel tubes that allow wires to pass through them), are typically welded to bands but they may also be glued directly (bonded) to molars. Failure of brackets, bands and bonded molar tubes slows down the progress of treatment with a fixed appliance. It can also be costly in terms of clinical time, materials and time lost from education/work for the patient. This is an update of the Cochrane review first published in 2011. A new full search was conducted on 15 February 2017 but no new studies were identified. We have only updated the search methods section in this new version. The conclusions of this Cochrane review remain the same. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes, and the relative effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes versus adhesives used to attach bands, during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of: (1) how often the tubes (or bands) come off during treatment; and (2) whether they protect the bonded (or banded) teeth against decay. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 15 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 1) in the Cochrane Library (searched 15 February 2017), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 15 February 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 15 February 2017). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes, bonded to first or second permanent molars. Trials which compared any type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (stainless steel or titanium) with any other adhesive, were included.Trials were also included where:(1) a tube was bonded to a molar tooth on one side of an arch and a band cemented to the same tooth type on the opposite side of the same arch;(2) molar tubes had been allocated to one tooth type in one patient group and molar bands to the same tooth type in another patient group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The selection of papers, decision about eligibility and data extraction were carried out independently and in duplicate without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials (n = 190), at low risk of bias, were included in the review and both presented data on first time failure at the tooth level. Pooling of the data showed a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands, with a hazard ratio of 2.92 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.80 to 4.72). No statistically significant heterogeneity was shown between the two studies. Data on first time failure at the patient level were also available and showed statistically different difference in favour of molar bands (risk ratio 2.30; 95% CI 1.56 to 3.41) (risk of event for molar tubes = 57%; risk of event for molar bands 25%).One trial presented data on decalcification again showing a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands. No other adverse events identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: From the two well-designed and low risk of bias trials included in this review it was shown that the failure of molar tubes bonded with either a chemically-cured or light-cured adhesive was considerably higher than that of molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement. One trial indicated that there was less decalcification with molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement than with bonded molar tubes cemented with a light-cured adhesive. However, given there are limited data for this outcome, further evidence is required to draw more robust conclusions.

Adhesives for fixed orthodontic bands.

BACKGROUND: Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. It has been shown that the quality of treatment result obtained with fixed appliances is much better than with removable appliances. Fixed appliances are, therefore, favoured by most orthodontists for treatment. The success of a fixed orthodontic appliance depends on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being attached securely to the teeth so that they do not become loose during treatment. Brackets are usually attached to the front and side teeth, whereas bands (metal rings that go round the teeth) are more commonly used on the back teeth (molars). A number of adhesives are available to attach bands to teeth and it is important to understand which group of adhesives bond most reliably, as well as reducing or preventing dental decay during the treatment period. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bands to teeth during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of:(1) how often the bands come off during treatment; and(2) whether they protect the banded teeth against decay during fixed appliance treatment. SEARCH METHODS: The following electronic databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (searched 2 June 2016), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 5) in the Cochrane Library (searched 2 June 2016), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 2 June 2016) and EMBASE Ovid (1980 to 2 June 2016). We searched ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and controlled clinical trials (RCTs and CCTs) (including split-mouth studies) of adhesives used to attach orthodontic bands to molar teeth were selected. Patients with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) who had bands attached to molars were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: All review authors were involved in study selection, validity assessment and data extraction without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Five RCTs and three CCTs were identified as meeting the review's inclusion criteria. All the included trials were of split-mouth design. Four trials compared chemically cured zinc phosphate and chemically cured glass ionomer; three trials compared chemically cured glass ionomer cement with light cured compomer; one trial compared chemically cured glass ionomer with a chemically cured glass phosphonate. Data analysis was often inappropriate within the studies meeting the inclusion criteria. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient high quality evidence with regard to the most effective adhesive for attaching orthodontic bands to molar teeth. Further RCTs are required.

Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether patients who had received early class III protraction facemask treatment were less likely to need orthognathic surgery compared with untreated controls. This paper is a 6-year follow-up of a previous clinical trial. DESIGN: Multi-centre 2-arm parallel randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Eight United Kingdom hospital orthodontic departments. PARTICIPANTS: Seventy three 7- to 9-year-old children. METHOD: Patients were randomly allocated, stratified for gender, into an early class III protraction facemask group (PFG) (n = 35) and a control/no treatment group (CG) (n = 38). The primary outcome, need for orthognathic surgery was assessed by panel consensus. Secondary outcomes were changed in skeletal pattern, overjet, Peer Assessment Rating (PAR), self-esteem and the oral aesthetic impact of malocclusion. The data were compared between baseline (DC1) and 6-year follow-up (DC4). A per-protocol analysis was carried out with n = 32 in the CG and n = 33 in the PFG. RESULTS: Thirty six percent of the PFG needed orthognathic surgery, compared with 66% of the CG (P = 0.027). The odds of needing surgery was 3.5 times more likely when protraction facemask treatment was not used (odds ratio = 3.34 95% CI 1.21-9.24). The PFG exhibited a clockwise rotation and the CG an anti-clockwise rotation in the maxilla (regression coefficient 8.24 (SE 0.75); 95% CI 6.73-9.75; P < 0.001) and the mandible (regression coefficient 6.72 (SE 0.73); 95% CI 5.27-8.18; P < 0.001). Sixty eight per cent of the PFG maintained a positive overjet at 6-year follow-up. There were no statistically significant differences between the PFG and CG for skeletal/occlusal improvement, self-esteem or oral aesthetic impact. CONCLUSIONS: Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery. However, this effect cannot be explained by the maintenance of skeletal cephalometric change.

Relationships between dental appearance, self-esteem, socio-economic status, and oral health-related quality of life in UK schoolchildren: A 3-year cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationships between dental appearance, characteristics of the individual and their environment, and oral health-related quality of life (OHQoL) in young people over time. METHODS: A total of 374 young people (122 boys, 252 girls) aged 11-12 years from seven different XX schools were recruited at baseline and 258 (78 boys, 180 girls) followed-up 3 years later, aged 14-15 years (69 per cent response rate). Participants completed a measure of OHQoL (CPQ11-14 ISF-16) and self-esteem (SE, CHQ-CF87). A clinical examination was undertaken, including clinician and self-assessed normative measures of need [Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN)] and dental caries. The Index of Multiple Deprivation was used to indicate socio-economic status (SES). RESULTS: There was a general improvement between baseline and follow-up in the measures of malocclusion, as well as OHQoL. Multiple linear regression indicated that there were significant cross-sectional associations at baseline between OHQoL and SES (rho = -0.11; P = 0.006), SE (rho = -0.50; P < 0.001), and self-assessed IOTN (rho = 0.27; P < 0.001). There were significant longitudinal associations between the change in OHQoL and change in SE (rho = -0.46; P < 0.001) and change in the decayed, missing, or filled surfaces (rho = -0.24; P = 0.001). The mean improvement in the total CPQ11-14 ISF-16 score for those with a history of orthodontic treatment was 3.2 (SD = 6.9; P = 0.009) and 2.4 (SD = 8.8; P < 0.001) for those with no history of treatment. The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.584). CONCLUSIONS: OHQoL improved in young people over time, whether they gave a history of orthodontic treatment or not. Individual and environmental characteristics influence OHQoL and should be taken into account in future studies.

The scientific evidence for pre-adjusted edgewise attachments and mechanics.

Introduction Fixed orthodontic appliance systems continue to evolve with a wealth of evidence emerging to underpin these refinements.Aims To present the evidence from comparative prospective research informing the selection of fixed appliance design and mechanics.Design Detailed literature review.Materials and methods An electronic search to identify randomised controlled trials and clinical controlled trials was undertaken using pre-defined search terms.Results Based on high-level evidence, no one bracket system has been proven superior in terms of efficiency or outcome. Similarly, a clear advantage associated with one wire type or dimension has not been shown. The effect of lacebacks in terms of anchorage management appears to be limited, while elastomeric chain and nickel titanium closing coils are associated with similar rates of space closure.Discussion A wealth of high-quality recent evidence to support the selection of fixed appliance attachments, archwires and auxiliaries, including lacebacks and space closing mechanics, was identified.Conclusions There has been a considerable increase in the amount of high-quality evidence informing the choice of pre-adjusted edgewise mechanics in recent years. This information can be used to make evidence-based decisions in the selection and manipulation of fixed appliances during daily practice.

Is early Class III protraction facemask treatment effective? A multicentre, randomized, controlled trial: 3-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of early class III protraction facemask treatment in children under 10 years of age at 3-year follow-up. DESIGN: Multicentre randomized controlled trial. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-three patients were randomly allocated, stratified for gender, into early class III protraction facemask group (PFG) (n = 35) and a control/no treatment group (CG) (n = 38). OUTCOMES: Dentofacial changes were assessed from lateral cephalograms and occlusal changes using the peer assessment rating (PAR). Self-esteem was assessed using the Piers-Harris children's self-concept scale, and the psychosocial impact of malocclusion with oral aesthetic subjective impact score (OASIS) questionnaire. Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) signs and symptoms were also recorded. The time points for data collection were at registration (DC1), 15 months later (DC2) and 3 years post-registration (DC3). RESULTS: The following mean skeletal and occlusal changes occurred from the class III starting point to DC3 (3-year follow-up): SNA, PFG moved forwards +2·3° (CG forward +1·6°; P = 0·14); SNB, PFG moved forwards +0·8° (CG forward +1·5°, P = 0·26); ANB, PFG class III base improved +1·5° (CG stayed about the same at +0·1°; P = 0·001). This contributed to an overall difference in ANB between PFG and CG of +1·4° in favour of early protraction facemask treatment. The overjet was still improved by +3·6 mm in the PFG and changed a small amount +1·1 mm in the CG (P = 0·001). A 21% improvement in PAR was shown in the PFG and the CG worsened by 8·4% (P = 0·02). There was no increase in self-esteem (Piers-Harris score) for PFG compared with the CG (P = 0·56) and no statistically significant difference in the impact of malocclusion (OASIS) between groups in terms of the changes from DC1 to DC3 (P = 0·18). TMJ signs and symptoms were very low at DC1 and DC3. CONCLUSIONS: The favourable effect of early class III protraction facemask treatment undertaken in patients under 10 years of age, is maintained at 3-year follow-up in terms of ANB, overjet and % PAR improvement. The direct protraction treatment effect at SNA is still favourable although not statistically significantly better than the CG. Seventy per cent of patients in PFG had maintained a positive overjet which we have defined as ongoing treatment success. Early protraction facemask treatment does not seem to influence self-esteem or reduce the patient's personal impact of their malocclusion at 3-year follow-up.

Adhesives for bonded molar tubes during fixed brace treatment.

BACKGROUND: Orthodontic treatment involves using fixed or removable appliances (dental braces) to correct the positions of teeth. The success of a fixed appliance depends partly on the metal attachments (brackets and bands) being glued to the teeth so that they do not become detached during treatment. Brackets (metal squares) are usually attached to teeth other than molars, where bands (metal rings that go round each tooth) are more commonly used. Orthodontic tubes (stainless steel tubes that allow wires to pass through them), are typically welded to bands but they may also be glued directly (bonded) to molars. Failure of brackets, bands and bonded molar tubes slows down the progress of treatment with a fixed appliance. It can also be costly in terms of clinical time, materials and time lost from education/work for the patient. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes, and the relative effectiveness of the adhesives used to attach bonded molar tubes versus adhesives used to attach bands, during fixed appliance treatment, in terms of: (1) how often the tubes (or bands) come off during treatment; and (2) whether they protect the bonded (or banded) teeth against decay. SEARCH STRATEGY: The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 16 December 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2010, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 16 December 2010) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 16 December 2010). There were no restrictions regarding language or date of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of participants with full arch fixed orthodontic appliance(s) with molar tubes, bonded to first or second permanent molars. Trials which compared any type of adhesive used to bond molar tubes (stainless steel or titanium) with any other adhesive, are included.Trials are also included where:(1) a tube is bonded to a molar tooth on one side of an arch and a band cemented to the same tooth type on the opposite side of the same arch; (2) molar tubes have been allocated to one tooth type in one patient group and molar bands to the same tooth type in another patient group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The selection of papers, decision about eligibility and data extraction were carried out independently and in duplicate without blinding to the authors, adhesives used or results obtained. All disagreements were resolved by discussion. MAIN RESULTS: Two trials (n = 190), at low risk of bias, were included in the review and both presented data on first time failure at the tooth level. Pooling of the data showed a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands, with a hazard ratio of 2.92 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.80 to 4.72). No statistically significant heterogeneity was shown between the two studies. Data on first time failure at the patient level were also available and showed statistically different difference in favour of molar bands (risk ratio 2.30; 95% CI 1.56 to 3.41) (risk of event for molar tubes = 57%; risk of event for molar bands 25%).One trial presented data on decalcification again showing a statistically significant difference in favour of molar bands. No other adverse events identified. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: From the two well-designed and low risk of bias trials included in this review it was shown that the failure of molar tubes bonded with either a chemically-cured or light-cured adhesive was considerably higher than that of molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement. One trial indicated that there was less decalcification with molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement than with bonded molar tubes cemented with a light-cured adhesive. However, given there are limited data for this outcome, further evidence is required to draw more robust conclusions.

Banding versus bonding of first permanent molars: a multi-centre randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of banding versus bonding of first permanent molars during fixed appliance treatment; in terms of attachment failure, patient discomfort and post-treatment enamel demineralization. DESIGN: Multi-centre randomized clinical trial. SETTING: One District General Hospital Orthodontic Department and two Specialist Orthodontic Practices. PARTICIPANTS: Orthodontic patients aged between 10 and 18 years old, randomly allocated to either receive molar bands (n=40) or molar bonds (n=40). METHOD: Bands were cemented with a conventional glass ionomer cement and tubes were bonded with light-cured composite to all four first permanent molar teeth for each subject. Attachments were reviewed at each recall appointment to assess loosening or loss. The clinical end point of the trial was the day of appliance debond. Enamel demineralization at debond was assessed using the modified International Caries Assessment and Detection System (ICDAS). RESULTS: The first time failure rate for molar bonds was 18·4% and 2·6% for molar bands (P=0·0002). Survival analysis demonstrated molar bonds were more likely to fail compared with molar bands. First permanent molars with bonded tubes experienced more demineralization than those with cemented bands (P=0·027). There was no statistically significant difference in discomfort experienced by patients after banding or bonding first permanent molars (P>0·05). CONCLUSION: This study shows that as part of fixed appliance therapy, American Orthodontics photoetched first permanent molar bands cemented with 3M ESPE Ketac-Cem perform better than American Orthodontics low profile photo-etched and mesh-based first permanent molar tubes bonded with 3M Unitek Transbond XT in terms of failure behaviour and molar enamel demineralization.

Is early Class III protraction facemask treatment effective? A multicentre, randomized, controlled trial: 15-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effectiveness of early class III protraction facemask treatment in children under 10 years of age. DESIGN: Multicentre, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Eight UK hospital orthodontic units. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Seventy-three patients were randomly allocated, stratified for gender, into an early class III protraction facemask group (PFG) (n = 35) and a control/no treatment group (CG) (n = 38). OUTCOMES: Dentofacial changes from lateral cephalograms and occlusal changes using the peer assessment rating (PAR). Self-esteem was assessed using the Piers-Harris children's self-concept scale, and the psychosocial impact of malocclusion with an oral aesthetic subjective impact scores (OASIS) questionnaire. Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) signs and symptoms were also recorded. The time points for data collection were at registration (DC1) and 15 months later (DC2). RESULTS: The following mean skeletal and occlusal changes occurred from the class III starting point: SNA, PFG moved forwards 1.4 degrees (CG forward 0.3 degrees; P = 0.018); SNB, PFG moved backwards -0.7 degrees (CG forward 0.8 degrees; P<0.001); ANB, PFG class III base improved +2.1 degrees (CG worsened by -0.5 degrees; P<0.001). This contributed to an overall difference in ANB between PFG and CG of 2.6 degrees in favour of early protraction facemask treatment. The overjet improved +4.4 mm in the PFG and marginally changed +0.3 mm in the CG (P<0.001). A 32.2% improvement in PAR was shown in the PFG and the CG worsened by 8.6%. There was no increased self-esteem (Piers-Harris score) for treated children compared with controls (P = 0.22). However, there was a reduced impact of malocclusion (OASIS score) for the PFG compared with the CG (P = 0.003), suggesting treatment resulted in slightly less concern about the tooth appearance. TMJ signs and symptoms were very low at DC1 and DC2 and none were reported during active facemask treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Early class III orthopaedic treatment, with protraction facemask, in patients under 10 years of age, is skeletally and dentally effective in the short term and does not result in TMJ dysfunction. Seventy per cent of patients had successful treatment, defined as achieving a positive overjet. However, early treatment does not seem to confer a clinically significant psychosocial benefit.

Juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA): a screening study to measure class II skeletal pattern, TMJ PDS and use of systemic corticosteroids.

OBJECTIVE: To screen patients with oligoarticular and polyarticular forms of Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis (JIA) to determine (i) the severity of their class II skeletal pattern; (ii) temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms and (iii) use of systemic corticosteroids. DESIGN: Cross-sectional screening. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Sixty-eight children with JIA aged between 9 and 16 years old who were screened at four regional treatment centres in the UK. METHOD: Patients were screened clinically and radiographically for the presence of class II skeletal pattern and temporomandibular (TMJ) pain dysfunction syndrome. In addition, the JIA sub-type and history of disease activity and medication were recorded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Class II skeletal pattern, TMJ signs and symptoms, use of systemic corticosteroids. RESULTS: The mean ANB values were 4.2 degrees (SD = 2.9 degrees) in the oligoarticular group and 5.1 degrees (SD = 3.8 degrees) in the polyarticular group. Just under one-third of children had a moderate or severe class II skeletal pattern and a further quarter of children had a mild class II skeletal pattern. Clinical signs and symptoms of temporomandibular joint pain dysfunction syndrome were low (<20%), except for crepitus and click which affected between 24 and 40% of JIA children. Radiographically, 57% of oligoarticular and 77% of polyarticular cases exhibited condylar erosion. Use of systemic corticosteroids varied between centres, but overall, was prescribed more in polyarticular cases (P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Just under one-third of oligoarticular and polyarticular JIA patients exhibited a moderate or severe class II skeletal pattern. It is, therefore, likely that any future clinical trial to investigate the effect of functional appliance treatment in JIA patients, will need multicentre co-operation to fulfil potential sample size requirements. Clinical signs and symptoms of temporomandibular joint pain dysfunction syndrome were low except for crepitus and click. However, radiographic evidence of condylar erosion was high particularly in the polyarticular group. Use of systemic corticosteroids was prescribed more in polyarticular cases and this is likely to reflect the severity of the disease.

The child perception questionnaire is valid for malocclusions in the United Kingdom.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to validate the child perception questionnaire (CPQ(11-14)) with a sample of schoolchildren in Greater Manchester, United Kingdom. METHODS: We made a longitudinal survey of children from 1999 to 2002, using the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN) at baseline when the children were 11 to 12 years old, the CPQ(11-14), and their uptake of orthodontic treatment 3 years later. RESULTS: CPQ(11-14) scores corresponded to differences in IOTN scores. These were related to the child's emotional and social well-being. Regression analysis showed that CPQ(11-14) scores were higher for girls, for higher grades of the dental health component of the IOTN, and for children who thought that their teeth needed straightening. CONCLUSIONS: CPQ(11-14) has acceptable reliability and validity, and is likely to be a useful measure for orthodontic trials. The impact of malocclusion on a child's quality of life might be substantial.

Index of orthodontic treatment need as a predictor of orthodontic treatment uptake.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the index of orthodontic treatment need (IOTN) could be weighted by using consumer-based sociodental measures to predict the uptake of orthodontic services. METHODS: The sample consisted of 525 schoolchildren, 11 to 12 years old, from Greater Manchester, United Kingdom. Child-perceived IOTN aesthetic component (AC), examiner IOTN AC and dental health component, and child socioeconomic status (Townsend score) were recorded. Two consumer sociodental measures (utility and oral aesthetic subjective impact scale values) were recorded. Three years later, the proportion of the subjects who had received orthodontic treatment or were on a waiting list for orthodontic treatment was recorded, and the rate of service uptake was determined. RESULTS: Sociodental indicators did not predict uptake of orthodontic services. A child with higher normative clinical treatment need was 3 times more likely to receive orthodontic treatment than a child with low clinical need (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Consumer-based sociodental information does not predict future use of orthodontic services. Factors such as clinical IOTN and child-perceived IOTN AC will adequately predict use of orthodontic services.

Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal effects.

This study evaluated the effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance for the developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion. This multicenter trial was carried out in the United Kingdom. A total of 174 children, aged 8 to 10 years old, with Class II Division 1 malocclusion were randomly allocated to receive treatment with a Twin-block appliance or to an untreated, control group. Data were collected at the start of the study and 15 months later. Results showed that early treatment with Twin-block appliances resulted in reduction of overjet, correction of molar relationships, and reduction in severity of malocclusion. Most of this correction was due to dentoalveolar change, but some was due to favorable skeletal change. Early treatment with the Twin-block appliance is effective in reducing overjet and severity of malocclusion. The small change in the skeletal relationship might not be considered clinically significant.

Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Herbst and Twin-block appliances for established Class II Division I malocclusion. The study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial carried out in orthodontic departments in the United Kingdom. A total of 215 patients (aged 11-14 years) were randomized to receive treatment with either the Herbst or the Twin-block appliance. Treatment with the Herbst appliance resulted in a lower failure-to-complete rate for the functional appliance phase of treatment (12.9%) than did treatment with Twin-block (33.6%). There were no differences in treatment time between appliances, but significantly more appointments (3) were needed for repair of the Herbst appliance than for the Twin-block. There were no differences in skeletal and dental changes between the appliances; however, the final occlusal result and skeletal discrepancy were better for girls than for boys. Because of the high cooperation rates of patients using it, the Herbst appliance could be the appliance of choice for treating adolescents with Class II Division 1 malocclusion. The trade-off for use of the Herbst is more appointments for appliance repair.