For Indirect Orthodontic Attachment Placement, Adding a Custom Composite Resin Base Is Not Beneficial: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

Author:

Hassan Mohamed S.1ORCID,Abdelsayed Fatma A.2ORCID,Abdelghany Amany H.2ORCID,Morse Zac3,Aboulfotouh Mai H.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Egyptian Russian University, Cairo, Egypt

2. Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

3. Department of Oral Health, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

Abstract

Aim. The aim of this study was to compare the chairside time, bond failure rate, and accuracy of bonding between two orthodontic attachment indirect bonding techniques. Methods and Materials. Two indirect bonding techniques were studied: unaltered base attachment (UA) and custom base attachment (CBA) methods. Eighty-four orthodontic attachments were bonded on six patient stone models. Preoperative models were digitally scanned, and subsequently, attachments were transferred with the aid of a single but sectioned vacuum-formed tray to their corresponding patients. Finally, participants were scanned after attachment bonding to make the postoperative digital replicas. Chairside time and immediate bond failure rates were measured and compared between both techniques. Postoperative and preoperative digital models were then superimposed in order to measure the accuracy of bonding in the three dimensions of space. Results. No differences existed between the two techniques regarding chairside time ( P = 0.87 ) and bond failure rates ( P = 0.37 ). There were also no differences found for the total attachment movement ( P = 0.73 ), mesiodistal ( P = 0.10 ), occlusogingival ( P = 0.31 ), torquing ( P = 0.21 ), and rotational measurements ( P = 0.18 ). The UA technique, however, proved to be more accurate for buccopalatal linear directions ( P = 0.04 ), whilst the CBA technique showed more accuracy for tipping angular deviations ( P < 0.01 ). There was a statistically significant directional bias for the UA towards the occlusal ( P < 0.01 ) and palatal ( P = 0.02 ) directions with mesial-out angular deviation ( P = 0.02 ). Conclusion. The two indirect bonding techniques were comparable for chairside time, bond failure rates, and most linear and angular measurements. The UA technique was, however, superior in buccopalatal directions, while the CBA method showed more tipping accuracy. Both techniques were efficient and reliable for indirect bonding.

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

Subject

General Dentistry

Cited by 2 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