Bonded versus banded first molar attachments: A randomized controlled clinical trial

Journal of Orthodontics

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 128-136

  Banks, Philip ^a   Macfarlane, Tatiana V ^b  

^a BURNLEY GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Intact; Molar attachment failure rates; Molar bonded tubes; Molar bonds; Randomized controlled clinical trial; Rely A Bond

Indexed keywords

GLASS IONOMER; RELY A BOND SYSTEM; RESIN CEMENT; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CEMENTATION; CHEMISTRY; CHILD; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ACID ETCHING; DENTAL BONDING; EQUIPMENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; MOLAR TOOTH; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHODONTICS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

ACID ETCHING, DENTAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CEMENTATION; CHILD; DENTAL BONDING; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; MALE; MOLAR; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE DESIGN; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES; ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS; ORTHODONTIC WIRES; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RESIN CEMENTS;

EID: 34447577993     PISSN: 14653125     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/146531207225022032     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Zachrisson BU. A posttreatment evaluation of direct bonding in orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1977; 71: 173-89.
2. Zachrisson BU, Brobakken BO. Clinical comparison of direct versus indirect bonding with different bracket types and adhesives. Am J Orthod 1978; 74: 62-77.
3. Reynolds IR, van Fraunhofer JA. Direct bonding of orthodontic attachments to teeth: the relation of adhesive bond strength to gauze mesh size. Br J Orthod 1976; 3: 91-95.
4. Thanos CE, Munholland T, Caputo AA. Adhesion of mesh-base direct-bonding brackets. Am J Orthod 1979; 75: 421-30. (Pubitemid 10158353)
5. Maijer R, Smith DC. Variables influencing the bond strength of metal orthodontic bracket bases. Am J Orthod 1981; 79: 20-34.
6. Regan D, van Noort R. Bond strengths of two integral bracket-base combinations: an in vitro comparison with foil mesh. Eur J Orthod 1989; 11: 144-53.
7. Johnston CD, Burden DJ, Hussey DL, Mitchell CC. Bonding to molars-the effect of etch time (an in vitro study). Eur J Orthod 1998; 20: 195-99. (Pubitemid 128490939)
8. Mattick CR, Hobson RS. A comparative microtopographic study of the buccal enamel of different tooth types. J Orthod 2000; 27: 143-48.
9. Knox J, Hubsch P, Jones ML, Middleton J. Influence of bracket base design on the strength of the bracket-cement interface. J Orthod 2000; 27: 249-54.
10. Banks PA. Bond failure rates - mini-twin versus standard brackets. British Orthodontic Society Clinical Effectiveness Working Party Newsletter. 2003; 16: 4.
11. Hobson RS, McCabe JF, Hogg SD. Bond strength to surface enamel for different tooth types. Dent Mater 2001; 17: 184-89. (Pubitemid 33651195)
12. Eliades T, Brantley WA. The inappropriateness of conventional orthodontic bond strength assessment protocols. Eur J Orthod 2000; 22: 13-23.
13. Pickett KL, Sadowsky PL, Jacobsen A, Lacefield W. Orthodontic in vivo bond strength: comparison with in vitro results. Angle Orthod 2001; 71: 141-48. (Pubitemid 33682430)
14. Millett DT, McCabe JF. Orthodontic bonding with glass ionomer cement-a review. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18: 385-99. (Pubitemid 126421977)
15. Sunna S, Rock WP. Clinical performance of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems: a randomized clinical trial. Br J Orthod 1998; 25: 283-87.
16. Fricker JP, McLachlan MD. Clinical studies of glass ionomer cements. Part 1-a twelve month clinical study comparing zinc phosphate cement to glass ionomer. Aust Orthod J 1985; 9: 179-80.
17. Millett DT, Gordon PH. The performance of first molar orthodontic bands cemented with glass ionomer cement-a retrospective analysis. Br J Orthod 1992; 19: 215-20.
18. Maijer R, Smith DC. A comparison between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cement in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 93: 27-39.
19. Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical study comparing four glass ionomer cements for the cementation of orthodontic molar bands. Aust Orthod J 1989; 11: 10-13.
20. Stirrups DR. A comparative clinical trial of a glass ionomer and a zinc phosphate cement for securing orthodontic bands. Br J Orthod 1991; 18: 15-20.
21. Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical comparison of resinmodified light-activated adhesives for the cementation of orthodontic molar bands. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 112: 239-43.
22. Millett DT, McCabe JF, Bennett TG, Carter NE, Gordon PH. The effect of sandblasting on the retention of first molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement. Br J Orthod 1995; 22: 161-69.
23. Hodges SJ, Gilthorpe MS, Hunt NP. The effect of microetching on the retention of orthodontic molar bands: a clinical trial. Eur J Orthod 2001; 23: 91-97. (Pubitemid 33671995)
24. Johnston CD, McSherry PF. The effects of sandblasting on the bond strength of molar attachments-an in vitro study. Eur J Orthod 1999; 21: 311-17.
25. Geiger AM, Gorelick L, Gwinnett AJ. Bond failure rates of facial and lingual attachments. J Clin Orthod 1983; 17: 165-69.
26. Millett DT, Hallgren A, Fornell A, Robertson M. Bonded molar tubes: a retrospective evaluation of clinical performance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115: 667-74.
27. Pandis N, Christensen L, Eliades T. Long-term clinical failure rate of molar tubes bonded with a self-etching primer. Angle Orthod 2005; 75: 1000-2. (Pubitemid 43127389)
28. Mandall NA, Millett DT, Mattick CR, Hickman J, Worthington HV, Macfarlane TV. Orthodontic adhesives: a systematic review. J Orthod 2002; 29: 205-10.
29. Årtun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid etch enamel pretreatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 333-40.
30. Phillimore P, Beattie A, Townsend P. Widening inequality of health in Northern England, 1981-91. BMJ 1994; 308: 1125-28. (Pubitemid 24130972)
31. Norman P. Calculating the Townsend index for the 2001 Census, 2005. Available at: http://census.ac.uk/cdu/2001/downloads/Calculating-2001- deprivation.doc
32. 2001 Census. Standard area statistics (England and Wales). Data service provider: Census Dissemination Unit, MIMAS (University of Manchester); service funder: Economic and Social Research Council (with the support of the Joint Information Systems Committee); data collection funder: Office for National Statistics; original data creator: Office for National Statistics; depositor: office for national statistics; registrar: census registration service (University of Essex).
33. Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomisation trials in health research. London: Arnold, 2000.
34. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables (with discussions). J R Stat Soc 1972; 34: 187-220.
35. Kerry SM, Bland JM. Sample size in cluster randomisation. BMJ 1998; 316: 549.