Evaluation of Time Consumption for Debonding Brackets Using Different Techniques: A Hospital-Based Study

Author:

Bora Neelutpal1,Mahanta Putul2ORCID,Konwar Ranjumoni3,Basumatari Bharati3,Phukan Chiranjita4,Kalita Deepjyoti5ORCID,Gojendra Singh Senjam6,Deka Sangeeta5

Affiliation:

1. Dentistry, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh 786002, Assam, India

2. Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh 786002, Assam, India

3. Radiology, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed Medical College and Hospital (FAAMC), Barpeta, Assam, India

4. Medicine, Tezpur Medical College and Hospital, Tezpur, Assam, India

5. Microbiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India

6. Department of Psychiatry, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal, India

Abstract

Background and Objectives. The debonding procedures of brackets in orthodontics cause a different amount of time loss and enamel damage. The current research assesses and equates the time consumption for bracket debonding using four different techniques. Materials and Methods. A total of 80 human premolars were included in this study. The samples were first arranged following a standard protocol for bracketing and then debonded using the ultrasonic scaler (US), debonding plier (DP), ligature cutter (LC), and thermal method (TM). Depending on the technique applied for debonding, the specimens were randomly divided into four groups with 20 samples, each keeping a 1 : 1 ratio. During the debonding process, the time taken for each bracket removal was recorded using a stopwatch. To assess the difference in mean time required for debonding among the four techniques, one-way ANOVA test was applied along with Tukey’s HSD to compare the two methods. Results. The time range and the mean time required for the four techniques analyzed show that the DP method has the highest range of time needed for debonding with 0.97–2.56 seconds, while LC methods have the least time range taking 0.46 to 1.79 seconds. TM’s mean time to debond is the highest at 1.5880 seconds. LC method has the lowest mean debonding time of 0.9880 seconds. The one-way ANOVA test has shown the mean debonding time required by the four techniques to be significantly different ( p < 0.001 ). Tukey’s HSD multiple comparisons also show that the mean time to debond using the LC method is substantially less than the other three methods ( p < 0.001 ). Conclusion. The mean debonding time for the TM was substantially the highest, followed by the US and DP. Debonding with the LC technique required the least time. This study shows some limelight towards the effectiveness of the LC method as it is the least time-consuming technique.

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

Subject

Health Informatics,Biomedical Engineering,Surgery,Biotechnology

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3