Class II functional orthopaedic treatment: A systematic review of systematic reviews

V. D'Antò, R. Bucci, L. Franchi, R. Rongo, A. Michelotti, R. Martina

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)624-642
Number of pages19
JournalJournal of Oral Rehabilitation
Volume42
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 1 2015

Fingerprint

Activator Appliances
Malocclusion
Controlled Clinical Trials
Orthopedics
Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Twin Studies
Expert Testimony
Research Design
Therapeutics
Growth

Keywords

  • Adolescent
  • Evidence-based dentistry
  • Growth and development
  • Malocclusion angle class II/therapy
  • Orthodontic appliances functional
  • Review literature as topic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Class II functional orthopaedic treatment : A systematic review of systematic reviews. / D'Antò, V.; Bucci, R.; Franchi, L.; Rongo, R.; Michelotti, A.; Martina, R.

In: Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, Vol. 42, No. 8, 01.08.2015, p. 624-642.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

D'Antò, V. ; Bucci, R. ; Franchi, L. ; Rongo, R. ; Michelotti, A. ; Martina, R. / Class II functional orthopaedic treatment : A systematic review of systematic reviews. In: Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. 2015 ; Vol. 42, No. 8. pp. 624-642.
@article{785aecdabfa047d297da365009e5052b,
title = "Class II functional orthopaedic treatment: A systematic review of systematic reviews",
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 Fr{\"a}nkel-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.",
keywords = "Adolescent, Evidence-based dentistry, Growth and development, Malocclusion angle class II/therapy, Orthodontic appliances functional, Review literature as topic",
author = "V. D'Ant{\`o} and R. Bucci and L. Franchi and R. Rongo and A. Michelotti and R. Martina",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/joor.12295",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "624--642",
journal = "Journal of Oral Rehabilitation",
issn = "0305-182X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Class II functional orthopaedic treatment

T2 - A systematic review of systematic reviews

AU - D'Antò, V.

AU - Bucci, R.

AU - Franchi, L.

AU - Rongo, R.

AU - Michelotti, A.

AU - Martina, R.

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Adolescent

KW - Evidence-based dentistry

KW - Growth and development

KW - Malocclusion angle class II/therapy

KW - Orthodontic appliances functional

KW - Review literature as topic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937023931&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937023931&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/joor.12295

DO - 10.1111/joor.12295

M3 - Article

C2 - 25824331

AN - SCOPUS:84937023931

VL - 42

SP - 624

EP - 642

JO - Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

JF - Journal of Oral Rehabilitation

SN - 0305-182X

IS - 8

ER -