| 1. |
- Abdulraheem, Salem, et al.
(författare)
-
Hawthorne effect reporting in orthodontic randomized controlled trials : truth or myth? Blessing or curse?
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 40:5, s. 475-479
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective To investigate in 10 orthodontic journals how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) considered the Hawthorne effect, and if considered, to determine whether it was related to the patients or the therapists involved in the trial and, finally, to discuss the Hawthorne effect in an educational way. Materials and methods A search was performed on the Medline database, via PubMed, for publication type ‘randomized controlled trial’ published for each journal between 1 August 2007 and 31 July 2017. The American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Angle Orthodontist, Australian Orthodontic Journal, Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics, European Journal of Orthodontics, Journal of Orthodontics, Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics, Korean Journal of Orthodontics, Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research and Progress in Orthodontics were assessed. Two independent reviewers extracted the data and identified whether the Hawthorne effect was considered or discussed in the articles and whether the Hawthorne effect was related to the behaviour of the patients, the therapists, or both. Results The initial search generated 502 possible trials. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 290 RCTs were included and assessed. The Hawthorne effect was considered or discussed in 10 of 290 RCTs (3.4%), and all were related to the patients’ and none to the therapists’ behaviour. Conclusions The Hawthorne effect reported in orthodontic RCTs was suboptimal. The researchers’ lack of knowledge about this phenomenon is evident, despite evidence that the Hawthorne effect may cause over-optimistic results or false-positive bias.
|
|
| 2. |
- Abdulraheem, Salem, et al.
(författare)
-
The reporting of blinding in orthodontic randomized controlled trials : where do we stand?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford Academic. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 41:1, s. 54-58
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To analyse in 10 orthodontic journals how many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) performed 'single-', 'double-', 'triple-', or 'outcome assessors blinding' and to evaluate, from the number of RCTs that did not conduct blinding, how many could actually have achieved it. Material and methods: Randomized controlled trials published in 10 orthodontic journals between 1 September 2012 and 28 February 2018 were included. A search was performed in PubMed and conducted for publication type 'randomized controlled trial' for each journal. Two reviewers independently analysed each RCT and registered that blinding was performed and included which specific type. It was also evaluated whether misclassifications of blinding items occurred and whether it was possible to achieve blinding among the RCTs that did not perform blinding. Results: After applying the inclusion criteria, 203 RCTs were assessed, and 61.6 per cent of them had used blinding, with the main type being 'outcome assessors blinding' (40.4%) followed by 'single-blinding' (15.3%), 'double-blinding' (2.5%), and 'triple-blinding' (3.4%). In 38.4 per cent of the trials, no blinding was performed; however, 79.4 per cent of them could have achieved blinding. Fifteen RCTs (7.3%) misclassified the blinding in relation to single-, double-, or triple-blinding. Journals followed the CONSORT (AJODO, EJO, JO, OCR) published together significantly more RCTs that performed blinding than journals not following the CONSORT. Conclusions: Blinding of outcome assessors was the most frequent type, as orthodontic trials are often of intervention design and thereby difficult to mask for patients and trial staff. The misclassifications of blinding items may indicate suboptimal knowledge among researchers and peer-reviewers regarding the definitions for diverse blinding types.
|
|
| 3. |
- Abrahamsson, Cecilia, et al.
(författare)
-
Masticatory function in patients with dentofacial deformities before and after orthognathic treatment : a prospective, longitudinal, and controlled study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 37:1, s. 67-72
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the self-estimated masticatory ability and masticatory performance in patients with dentofacial deformities before and after orthognathic treatment; in comparison to an age- and gender-matched control group. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The masticatory ability and masticatory performance were evaluated in 121 consecutive patients (treatment group), referred for orthognathic treatment. Eighteen months after treatment, 98 patients (81%) completed a follow-up examination. Masticatory ability was assessed on a visual analog scale, while the masticatory performance was evaluated by a masticatory test using round silicon tablets. Signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) were registered by a clinical examination and a questionnaire. The control group comprised 56 age- and gender-matched subjects who were examined at baseline. RESULTS: At the baseline examination, the treatment group had a significantly lower masticatory ability and performance compared with the control group. After treatment, the masticatory ability significantly improved in the treatment group and reached the same level as in the control group. The masticatory performance index increased significantly but was still lower than in the control group. Both the masticatory ability and masticatory performance were affected by the number of occlusal contacts during maximal biting pressure and by the self-estimated overall symptoms of TMD. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with dentofacial deformities, corrected by orthognathic treatment, have a significant positive treatment outcome in respect of masticatory ability and masticatory performance. Furthermore, the occlusion and symptoms of TMD have an impact on both masticatory ability and masticatory performance.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Algharbi, Muteb, et al.
(författare)
-
Do Different Maxillary Expansion Appliances Influence the Outcomes of the Treatment?
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 40:1, s. 97-106
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and objectives: There is no consensus in the literature regarding which rapid maxillary expansion (RME) design or activation rate benefits the patients the most. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review was to see whether there is a difference in the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of different RME appliances in children and growing adolescents. The secondary aim was to see whether these effects are different when using different activation protocols for these appliances. Data collection and analysis: The search was done in three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science). The following inclusion criteria were used: randomized controlled trial, prospective controlled studies, 15 or more patients in each study, human subjects up to 18 years of age, and RME effects had to be assessed by computed tomography/cone beam computed tomography. Study appraisal and synthesis methods: Quality of the methodology was classified according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines as high, moderate, or low. Results: The search resulted in 145 titles and abstracts; 109 of them were excluded based on pre-established criteria. Thirty-six full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 18 of which satisfied the inclusion criteria. Finally, seven articles were deemed eligible for full inclusion and revealed that all appliances and protocols showed significant expansion in the mid-palatal suture. No evidence was found for the cause of dental tipping. Limitations: In this systematic review, having different age groups in each study and using different anatomical landmarks and outcome measures for assessing the skeletal and dental effects made it difficult to conduct a meta-analysis. Conclusions: There is moderate evidence that all designs produce significant expansion at the mid-palatal suture. However, lack of studies comparing appliances and protocols has been found. Finally, no evidence-based conclusions could be drawn about the appliance effect on teeth tipping.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Bayat, J. T., et al.
(författare)
-
Determinants of orthodontic treatment need and demand: a cross-sectional path model study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 39:1, s. 85-91
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To put forward a model predicting orthodontic treatment need and demand. Furthermore, to explore how much of the variance in treatment demand could be explained by a set of self-assessed measures, and how these measures relate to professionally assessed treatment need. Subjects and methods: One hundred and fifty adolescents, aged 13 years, completed a questionnaire which included a set of self-assessed measures dealing with self-esteem, such as dental and global self-esteem, various aspects of malocclusion, such as perceived malocclusion and perceived functional limitation, and treatment demand. Treatment need was assessed by Dental Health Component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need grading. Path analysis was used to examine the relations between the measures and if they could predict treatment need and demand. Results: The measures proved to be reliable and inter-correlated. Path analysis revealed that the proposed model had good fit to the data, providing a test of the unique effect of all included measures on treatment need and demand. The model explained 33% of the variance in treatment demand and 22% of the variance in treatment need. Limitations: The specific age group could affect the generalizability of the findings. Moreover, although showing good fit to data, the final model is based on a combination of theoretical reasoning and semi-explorative approach. Conclusions: The proposed model displays the unique effect of each included measure on treatment need and demand, explaining a large proportion of the variance in perceived treatment demand and professionally assessed treatment need. The model would hopefully lead to improved and more cost-efficient predictions of treatment need and demand.
|
|
| 9. |
- Bayat, J. T., et al.
(författare)
-
Predicting orthodontic treatment need: reliability and validity of the Demand for Orthodontic Treatment Questionnaire
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 39:3, s. 326-333
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To identify key measures in predicting orthodontic treatment need and to propose a self-assessment instrument that improves treatment need assessment. Subjects and methods: The study included 150 randomly selected 13-year-olds. A set of measures linked to a previous study on daily life impact of malocclusion was processed, resulting in an instrument, the Demand for Orthodontic Treatment Questionnaire (DOTQ), which was analysed regarding dimensionality, reliability and validity. Dental Health Component of the Index of Orthodontic Treatment Need (IOTN-DHC) grading, representing professionally assessed treatment need, were collected from dental records. The instrument's ability to predict treatment need was tested by randomly splitting the dataset into two subgroups, using multiple regression to predict DHC in one of the groups and the prediction equation to calculate predicted DHC in the other. The outcomes were then correlated to detect the predictive power of the DOTQ, and thereby the validity of the prediction. Results: The DOTQ-measures were reliable and highly inter-correlated. A high, significant correlation was found between assessed and predicted treatment need for the subgroups (r = 0.59 and 0.49), confirming the validity of the prediction. Independent variables (the measures) explained 47 per cent (R = 0.69) of the variance in treatment need. Four measures contributed significantly to the prediction, with Treatment Demand being the most powerful predictor. Limitations: The age group and response rate may raise some questions regarding the generalizability of the findings. Conclusions: The DOTQ is able to predict treatment need as assessed by orthodontic consultants. Its incorporation in the treatment need assessment process will acknowledge patients' self-perceived impact of malocclusion.
|
|
| 10. |
- Bazargani, Farhan, 1969-, et al.
(författare)
-
Effects on Nasal Airflow and Resistance Using Two Different RME Appliances : A Randomized Controlled Trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Orthodontics. - : Oxford University Press. - 0141-5387 .- 1460-2210. ; 40:3, s. 281-284
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To evaluate and compare the effects of tooth-borne (TB) and tooth-bone-borne (TBB) rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on nasal airflow and resistance. Material and methods: Fifty-four consecutive patients who met the eligibility criteria were recruited from September 2010 to December 2015. Of these 54 subjects, 40 agreed to participate in the part of the study involving evaluation of nasal flow and resistance. The 40 subjects were allocated to either the TB group, mean age 9.7 years (SD 1.5), or the TBB group, mean age 10.2 years (SD 1.4). All subjects performed rhinomanometric registration at baseline (T-0), but only 30 attended the post-expansion registration (T-1), of whom 16 had been randomized to the TB group and 14 to the TBB group. The study outcomes, nasal airflow and nasal airway resistance, were evaluated with linear regression adjusted for baseline variable of the outcome to compare the study groups with complete cases strategy as well as after multiple imputation (MI). Randomization: Participants were randomly allocated in blocks of different sizes, using the concealed allocation principle in a 1:1 ratio. The randomization list was computer generated to ensure homogeneity between groups. Blinding: Blinding was done only for outcome assessor due to clinical limitations. The care providers at the ENT unit who conducted all the rhinomanometry examinations were blinded to which group the patients were allocated to. Results: Complete case analysis showed significantly higher post-expansion nasal airflow values for the TBB group compared with the TB group, mean difference 51.0 cm(3)/s (P = 0.018). The evaluation after MI showed a similar significant mean difference, 52.7 cm(3)/s (P = 0.020) in favour of the TBB group when taking into account the missing values from the T-1 examination. Even reduction in nasal airway resistance showed similar pattern in favour of the TBB group. Limitations: Our results represent the short-term effects. A longer follow-up period would have been preferable. Conclusions: The TBB RME induced significantly higher nasal airway flow and lower nasal resistance values than TB RME. It might be wiser to use TBB RME in cases with constricted maxilla and upper airway obstruction.
|
|
