Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Class II functional orthopaedic treatment: a systematic review of systematic reviews.
D'Antò, V; Bucci, R; Franchi, L; Rongo, R; Michelotti, A; Martina, R.
Afiliación
  • D'Antò V; Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Oral Sciences, School of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular disorders, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
  • Bucci R; Dentist Unit, Department of Pediatric Surgery, "Bambino Gesù" Children Hospital, Rome, Italy.
  • Franchi L; Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Oral Sciences, School of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular disorders, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
  • Rongo R; Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine-Orthodontics, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
  • Michelotti A; Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Oral Sciences, School of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular disorders, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
  • Martina R; Department of Neuroscience, Reproductive Sciences and Oral Sciences, School of Orthodontics and Temporomandibular disorders, University of Naples "Federico II", Naples, Italy.
J Oral Rehabil ; 42(8): 624-42, 2015 Aug.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25824331
ABSTRACT
This Systematic Review (SR) aims to assess the quality of SRs and Meta-Analyses (MAs) on functional orthopaedic treatment of Class II malocclusion and to summarise and rate the reported effects. Electronic and manual searches were conducted until June 2014. SRs and MAs focusing on the effects of functional orthopaedic treatment of Class II malocclusion in growing patients were included. The methodological quality of the included papers was assessed using the AMSTAR (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews). The design of the primary studies included in each SR was assessed with Level of Research Design scoring. The evidence of the main outcomes was summarised and rated according to a scale of statements. 14 SRs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The appliances evaluated were as follows Activator (2 studies), Twin Block (4 studies), headgear (3 studies), Herbst (2 studies), Jasper Jumper (1 study), Bionator (1 study) and Fränkel-2 (1 study). Four studies reviewed several functional appliances, as a group. The mean AMSTAR score was 6 (ranged 2-10). Six SRs included only controlled clinical trials (CCTs), three SRs included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four SRs included both CCTs and RCTs and one SR included also expert opinions. There was some evidence of reduction of the overjet, with different appliances except from headgear; there was some evidence of small maxillary growth restrain with Twin Block and headgear; there was some evidence of elongation of mandibular length, but the clinical relevance of this results is still questionable; there was insufficient evidence to determine an effect on soft tissues.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ortodoncia Correctiva / Ortopedia / Literatura de Revisión como Asunto / Metaanálisis como Asunto / Maloclusión Clase II de Angle Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Oral Rehabil Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ortodoncia Correctiva / Ortopedia / Literatura de Revisión como Asunto / Metaanálisis como Asunto / Maloclusión Clase II de Angle Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Oral Rehabil Año: 2015 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Italia