Fadi Ata-Ali1, Javier Ata-Ali2, Marcela Ferrer-Molina3, Teresa Cobo4, Felix De Carlos5, Juan Cobo6. 1. Collaborator professor, Area of Orthodontics, Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, Medical and Dental School, University of Oviedo, Instituto Asturiano de Odontologia, Oviedo, Spain. Electronic address: losataali@hotmail.com. 2. Public Dental Health Service, Arnau de Vilanova Hospital; associate professor, European University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 3. Adjunct professor, Stomatology Department, Medical and Dental School, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. 4. Assistant professor, Area of Orthodontics, Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, Medical and Dental School, University of Oviedo, Instituto Asturiano de Odontologia, Oviedo, Spain. 5. Associate professor, Area of Orthodontics, Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialities, Medical and Dental School, University of Oviedo, Instituto Asturiano de Odontologia, Oviedo, Spain. 6. Chairman, Area of Orthodontics, Department of Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialities, Medical and Dental School, University of Oviedo, Instituto Asturiano de Odontologia, Oviedo, Spain.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the prevalence of adverse effects associated with lingual and buccal fixed orthodontic techniques. METHODS: Two authors searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases up to October 2014. Agreement between the authors was quantified by the Cohen kappa statistic. The following variables were analyzed: pain, caries, eating and speech difficulties, and oral hygiene. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used for randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Eight articles were included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis showed a statistically greater risk of pain of the tongue (odds ratio [OR], 28.32; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 8.60-93.28; P <0.001), cheeks (OR, 0.087; 95% CI, 0.036-0.213; P <0.0010), and lips (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04-0.39; P <0.001), as well as for the variables of speech difficulties (OR, 9.39; 95% CI, 3.78-23.33; P <0.001) and oral hygiene (OR, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.02-11.95; P = 0.047) with lingual orthodontics. However, no statistical difference was found with respect to eating difficulties (OR, 3.74; 95% CI, 0.86-16.28; P = 0.079) and caries (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.17-7.69; P = 0.814 [Streptococcus mutans] and OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.20-2.23; P = 0.515 [Lactobacillus]). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that patients wearing lingual appliances have more pain, speech difficulties, and problems in maintaining adequate oral hygiene, although no differences for eating and caries risk were identified. Further prospective studies involving larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these results.
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the prevalence of adverse effects associated with lingual and buccal fixed orthodontic techniques. METHODS: Two authors searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and LILACS databases up to October 2014. Agreement between the authors was quantified by the Cohen kappa statistic. The following variables were analyzed: pain, caries, eating and speech difficulties, and oral hygiene. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess risk of bias in nonrandomized studies, and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias was used for randomized controlled trials. RESULTS: Eight articles were included in this systematic review. Meta-analysis showed a statistically greater risk of pain of the tongue (odds ratio [OR], 28.32; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 8.60-93.28; P <0.001), cheeks (OR, 0.087; 95% CI, 0.036-0.213; P <0.0010), and lips (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04-0.39; P <0.001), as well as for the variables of speech difficulties (OR, 9.39; 95% CI, 3.78-23.33; P <0.001) and oral hygiene (OR, 3.49; 95% CI, 1.02-11.95; P = 0.047) with lingual orthodontics. However, no statistical difference was found with respect to eating difficulties (OR, 3.74; 95% CI, 0.86-16.28; P = 0.079) and caries (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.17-7.69; P = 0.814 [Streptococcus mutans] and OR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.20-2.23; P = 0.515 [Lactobacillus]). CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that patients wearing lingual appliances have more pain, speech difficulties, and problems in maintaining adequate oral hygiene, although no differences for eating and caries risk were identified. Further prospective studies involving larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these results.
Authors: Guido Artemio Marañón-Vásquez; Luísa Schubach da Costa Barreto; Matheus Melo Pithon; Lincoln Issamu Nojima; Matilde da Cunha Gonçalves Nojima; Mônica Tirre de Souza Araújo; Margareth Maria Gomes de Souza Journal: Korean J Orthod Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 1.372
Authors: Hugo Baptista-Sánchez; Laura Antonio-Zancajo; Alberto Albaladejo-Martínez; Pedro Colino Gallardo; Daniele Garcovich; Mario Alvarado-Lorenzo; Alfonso Alvarado-Lorenzo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-29 Impact factor: 4.614