Abstract
The objective of this article was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to contrast the existing evidence on the effect of mechanical vibrations, either high or low frequency, as an alternative to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement in humans. A literature search from 2010 to June 2021 was conducted in the electronic databases: PubMed, NCBI, Google Scholar, EBSCO, Cochrane, and Ovid, using the eligibility criteria to identify the studies. Only randomized clinical trials (RCT) were included. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool and the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies was evaluated according to the Cochrane bias risk tool. Fifteen RTCs were included for final review. Overall, the RoB was classified as low (3), moderate (5), and high (7). Three articles with low RoB, four with moderate RoB, and four with high RoB found no significant effect in the use of vibrations on orthodontic movement. Only four articles, three of them with high RoB and one with moderate RoB, found that mechanical vibrations are effective at accelerating orthodontic tooth movement. The results seemed to indicate that there is no evidence that vibratory stimuli can increase the rate of dental movement or reduce neither the time of dental alignment nor canine retraction during orthodontic treatment. It is important to note that a greater number of high-quality randomized controlled trials are urgently needed.
Highlights
Orthodontic treatment requires a remarkable diagnostic judgment, as well as a wide clinical mastery; despite the vast capabilities of the orthodontist, patients will become hesitant to seek care due to the duration of treatment and pain related to it, which are the main dilemmas before accepting a treatment
The results of this work showed that there is a lack of quality-randomized clinical studies without potential risks of bias that evaluate either high- or low-frequency vibrations effects on orthodontic tooth movement, being even fewer than the number of studies found at high frequency [22,25,29,30,31]
Most of the studies analyzed in this systematic review had a high risk of bias (RoB) (7) or moderate
Summary
Orthodontic treatment requires a remarkable diagnostic judgment, as well as a wide clinical mastery; despite the vast capabilities of the orthodontist, patients will become hesitant to seek care due to the duration of treatment and pain related to it, which are the main dilemmas before accepting a treatment. A maximum biological response with minimal side-effects in a short time is an ideal objective; for this purpose, there are currently some available methods and techniques. These methods and techniques are divided into surgical: corticotomies and micro-osseoperforations; and those of a physical, biological, or mechanical environment: photobiomodulation, electromagnetic pulses, pharmacotherapy, and, of particular interest for this work, mechanical vibrations; in the case of the last alternative, the research is still unfinished or debatable [2,3,4,5,6,7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
