Does Clear Aligner Treatment Result in Different Patient Perceptions of Treatment Process and Outcomes Compared to Conventional/Traditional Fixed Appliance Treatment: A Literature Review

Abstract

This study sought to systematically review the literature to determine whether clear aligner treatment results in different patient perceptions of treatment process and outcomes compared with conventional fixed appliance treatment. A systematic review was conducted to identify studies that examined differences in patient perceptions between clear aligners and conventional fixed appliance treatment. Studies were identified through searching relevant terms using PubMed and Embase. Following review of identified articles, key information about the studies including study design, setting, comparison groups, sample size/response rate, study location, primary outcomes, and statistical tests used were extracted. A total of 13 articles were identified that met the inclusion criteria for this study. These studies described a variety of outcomes which were divided into two broad categories: treatment process (pain, chewing, speech, daily routine, etc.) and treatment outcomes (satisfaction level, smile outcome perceptions, etc.). There was the strongest evidence that clear aligners had a positive impact with respect to treatment process compared with fixed orthodontic appliances. This study highlights that clear aligners may be effective for improving treatment-process-related outcomes among orthodontic patients. More studies need to be conducted to determine whether clear aligners have a beneficial impact with respect to treatment outcomes.

Clear Aligners and Smart Eye Tracking Technology as a New Communication Strategy between Ethical and Legal Issues

“…In our study, we decided to include only non-orthodontic and orthodontic patients and to exclude dentists and specialists precisely because asking clinicians to aesthetically evaluate aligners might not be meaningful, since personal knowledge and preferences can understandably influence both the answers to a questionnaire and gaze analysis. Other studies have documented the meaningful differences that exist between orthodontists and general dentists in judging perspectives and perceptions of therapies using clear aligners and in assessing the complexity of cases on which the therapeutic choice then depends [ 63 , 64 , 65 ]. Surely, the clear aligners are perceived by patients more positively than fixed multibracket therapy with respect to the treatment process [ 66 ], and that holds true based on our study where both groups would wear aligners, consider them better overall than other systems, and would recommend them to others, although for the non-orthodontic group, clear aligners are perceived to cost more than other types of braces.…”

Clear aligner’s adverse effects: A systematic review protocol

“…In a systematic review examining patients’ perceptions of clear aligner treatments, the authors recognized the necessity for additional studies investigating subjective outcomes compared to traditional devices. Particularly, there is a call for studies addressing challenges in speaking, chewing, sleeping, and discomfort associated with clear aligners [ 14 ].…”

Effectiveness of the Attachment Design and Thickness of Clear Aligners during Orthodontic Anterior Retraction: Finite Element Analysis

“…In contrast to typical fixed orthodontic appliances, clear aligners are removable and clear; hence, patients may select CAT for aesthetic reasons. 3 Improved patient acceptability and a high quality of life are the primary benefits of CAT. Compared with conventional fixed braces, CAT is less painful and more effective in improving periodontal tissue health and minimizing apical resorptions, dental trauma, and microbial risk.…”