DOI 10.1007/s40368-021-00683-6
Prevalence of anterior open bite in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Anterior open bite is defined by the lack of incisal contact between the teeth in centric relation. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of anterior open in children and adolescents.
METHODS
This systematic review included a search in the databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, LILACS, Google Scholar, and ProQuest. The acronym PECOS was considered: (P) children and adolescents, (E) presence of anterior open bite, (C) not applicable, (O) prevalence, and (S) observational studies. The risk of bias assessment was carried out using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Studies Reporting Prevalence Data. The prevalence meta-analyses were performed using MedCalc® software. The certainty of the evidence was determined with the GRADE approach.
RESULTS
26 studies were included. Eleven studies were judged at low, seven at moderate, and eight at high risk of bias. The overall prevalence of anterior open bite was 16.52% (95% CI 12.34-21.17) in children and adolescents. The prevalence was 19.38% (95% CI 13.77-25.69) in South America. The prevalence of anterior open bite was 22.67% (95% CI 16.56-29.43) among females and 16.99% (95% CI 11.77-22.94) among males. The prevalence of anterior open bite was 18.84% (95% CI 13.88-24.38) in the primary dentition, and 14.26% (95% CI 7.67-22.46) in the mixed dentition. The overall certainty of the evidence was very low.
CONCLUSION
The overall prevalence of anterior open bite was 16.52% in children and adolescents aged 2-16 years. Giving the limitations of a prevalence meta-analysis, the extrapolation of the results should be cautious.
REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020183162, 10 July 2020.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.