Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Volumn 2018, Issue 4, 2018, Pages

  Mandall, Nicky A ^a   Hickman, Joy ^b   Macfarlane, Tatiana V ^c   Mattick, Rye C R ^d   Millett, Declan T ^e   Worthington, Helen V ^f  

^a TAMESIDE GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b GLAN CLWYD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^d NEWCASTLE DENTAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

^f UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADHESIVE AGENT; COMPOMER; FLUORIDE; GLASS IONOMER; RESIN; TOOTH CEMENT;

DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CARIES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POLYMERIZATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOOTH DISEASE; ORTHODONTIC BRACKET; OSTEOPOROSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC);

COMPOMERS; DECALCIFICATION, PATHOLOGIC; DENTAL BONDING; DENTAL CEMENTS; GLASS IONOMER CEMENTS; HUMANS; ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 84988578597     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1469493X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002282.pub2     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Millett DT, McCluskey LA, McAuley F, Creanor SL, Newell J, Love J. A comparative clinical trial of a compomer and a resin adhesive for orthodontic bonding. Angle Orthodontist 2000;70:233-40. 2637515
2. Norevall LI, Marcusson A, Persson M. A clinical evaluation of a glass ionomer cement as an orthodontic bonding adhesive compared with an acrylic resin. European Journal of Orthodontics 1996;18:373-84. 2637517
3. O'Brien KD, Read MJF, Sandison RJ, Roberts CT. A visible light-activated direct-bonding material: An in vivo comparative study. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1989;95:348-51. 2637519
4. Ash S, Hay N. Adhesive pre-coated brackets, a comparative clinical study. British Journal of Orthodontics 1996;23:325-9. 2637521
5. Banks PA, Burn A, O'Brien KD. A clinical evaluation of the effectiveness of including fluoride into an orthodontic bonding adhesive. European Journal of Orthodontics 1997;19:391-5. 2637523
6. Cacciafesta V, Bosch C, Melsen B. Clinical comparison between a resin-reinforced self-cured glass ionomer cement and a composite resin for direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. Part 2: bonding on dry enamel and on enamel soaked with saliva. Clinical Orthodontics and Research 1999;2:186-93. 2637525
7. Chung CH, Piatti A. Clinical comparison of the bond failure rates between fluoride-releasing and non-fluoride releasing composite resins. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 2000;XXXIV:409-12. 2637527
8. Saeytijd C De, Carels CEL, Lesaffre E. An evaluation of a light-curing composite for bracket placement. European Journal of Orthodontics 1994;16:541-5. 2637529
9. Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical evaluation of a glass polyalkenoate cement for the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1992;101:381-4. 2637531
10. Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical evaluation of a light- activated glass polyalkenoate (ionomer) cement for the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1994;105:502-5. 2637533
11. Fricker JP. A new self-curing resin-modified glass-ionomer cement for the direct bonding of orthodontic brackets in vivo. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998;113:384-6. 2637535
12. Galindo HRA, Sadowsky PL, Vlachos C, Jacobson A, Wallace D. An in vivo comparison between a visible light-cured bonding system and a chemically cured bonding system. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998;113:271-5. 2637537
13. Gaworski M, Borislow AJ, Braitman LE. Decalcification and bond failure: A comparison of a glass ionomer and a composite resin bonding system in vivo. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1999;116:518-21. 2637539
14. Hons I. A comparative study of four orthodontic bonding systems. A comparative study of treatment effects of two Herbst appliances (Abstract). European Journal of Orthodontics 1994;16(5):456. 2637541
15. Lovius BBJ, Pender N, Hewage S, O'Dowling I, Tomkins A. A clinical trial of a light activated bonding material over an 18 month period. British Journal of Orthodontics 1987;14:11-20. 2637543
16. Miguel JAM, Almeida MA, Chevitarese O. Clinical comparison between a glass ionomer cement and a composite for direct bonding of orthodontic brackets. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1995;107:484-7. 2637545
17. Miller JR, Arbuckle G, Baldwin J, Phillips RW. A three-year clinical trial using a glass ionomer cement for the bonding of orthodontic brackets. Angle Orthodontist 1996;66:309-12. 2637547
18. Mitchell L. An investigation into the effect of a fluoride releasing adhesive on the prevalence of enamel surface changes associated with directly bonded orthodontic attachments. British Journal of Orthodontics 1992;19:207-14. 2637549
19. Shamma I, Ngan P, Kim H, Kao E, Gladwin M, Gunel E, et al. Comparison of bracket debonding force between two conventional resin adhesives and a resin-reinforced glass ionomer cement: An in vitro and in vivo study. Angle Orthodontist 1999;69:463-9. 2637551
20. Sonis AL, Snell W. An evaluation of a fluoride-releasing, visible light-activated bonding system for orthodontic bracket placement. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1989;95:306-11. 2637553
21. Sunna S, Rock WP. Clinical performance of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems: A randomised clinical trial. British Journal of Orthodontics 1998;25:283-7. 2637555
22. Trimpaneers LM, Dermaut LR. A clinical trial comparing the failure rates of two orthodontic bonding systems. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1996;110:547-50. 2637557
23. Turner PJ. The clinical evaluation of a fluoride containing orthodontic bonding material. British Journal of Orthodontics 1993;20:307-13. 2637559
24. Underwood ML, Rawls HR, Zimmerman BF. Clinical evaluation of a fluoride-exchanging resin as an orthodontic adhesive. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1989;96:93-9. 2637561
25. Zacchrisson BU, Brobakken BO. Clinical comparison of direct versus indirect bonding with different bracket types and adhesives. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1978;74:62-78. 2637563
26. Dental Practice Board, Statistical Department, Compton Place Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex, UK. (Correspondence) 1998.
27. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Scheider M, Minder CE. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997;315:629-34.
28. Evans R, Shaw WC. Preliminary evaluation of an illustrated scale for rating dental attractiveness. European Journal of Orthodontics 1987;9:314-8.
29. Holmes A. The prevalence of orthodontic treatment need. British Journal of Orthodontics 1992;19:177-82.
30. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editor(s). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from handbook.cochrane.org.
31. O'Brien KD, Shaw WC, Roberts CT. The use of occlusal indices in assessing the provision of orthodontic treatment by the hospital service of England and Wales. British Dental Journal 1993;20:25-35.
32. Richmond S, Shaw WC, Stephens CD, Webb WG, Roberts CT, Andrews M. Orthodontics in the General Dental Service of England and Wales. British Dental Journal 1993;174:315-29.
33. Russell JI, Pearson AI, Bowden DEJ, Wright J, O'Brien KD. The Consultant Orthodontic Service - 1998 Survey. British Dental Journal 1999;187:149-53.
34. Mandall NA, Hickman J, Macfarlane TV, Mattick RCR, Millett DT, Worthington HV. Adhesives for fixed orthodontic brackets. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2003, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002282]