Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy of different residual orthodontic adhesive removing methods for rebonding debonded metal attachments.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| sandblasted group (T1) | Experimental | the side of mouth patient that receives fixed orthodontic appliance that renewed by sandblast |
|
| control group (T3) | Placebo Comparator | the side of mouth patient that receives new fixed orthodontic appliance. |
|
| tungsten bur group (T0) | Experimental | the side of mouth patient that receives fixed orthodontic appliance that renewed by tungsten bur. |
|
| control group (T2) | Placebo Comparator | the side of mouth patient that receives new fixed orthodontic appliance. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recycling orthodontic brackets | Procedure | T0: The adhesive removal will be performed by high-speed hand piece with tungsten carbide bur. the bur will be changed every five attachments. T1: Control group of T0. T2: The adhesive removal will be performed by sandblasting via Micro-etcher. T3: Control group of T2. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The number of bonding failures will be compared using the chi-square test. | evaluate and compare the bond failure rates. different quadrants and arches.To evaluate and compare the bond failure rates of rebonded attachments(brackets and molar tubes)using two methods (Tungsten carbide bur and sandblasting)) to remove the adhesive remnant and comparing them with contralateral teeth. | baselines |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The bonding failure between each quadrant will be compared by one way ANOVA. | evaluate and compare the bond failure rates. different quadrants and arches. | bsaelines |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 private dental clinics in Iraq and special center in Karbala. | Baghdad | Iraq |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30369810 | Background | Ahmed T, Rahman NA, Alam MK. Assessment of in vivo bond strength studies of the orthodontic bracket-adhesive system: A systematic review. Eur J Dent. 2018 Oct-Dec;12(4):602-609. doi: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_22_18. | |
| 22051490 | Background | Alessandri Bonetti G, Zanarini M, Incerti Parenti S, Lattuca M, Marchionni S, Gatto MR. Evaluation of enamel surfaces after bracket debonding: an in-vivo study with scanning electron microscopy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Nov;140(5):696-702. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.02.027. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
split-mouth, cross-quadrant
Not provided
Not provided
The attachments will carry out by main investigator who give each side coded key then the attachments will be rebond by blind specialist. The participants will be blinded to group assignment and interventions (double-blinded trial).
|
| 16539561 | Background | Eminkahyagil N, Arman A, Cetinsahin A, Karabulut E. Effect of resin-removal methods on enamel and shear bond strength of rebonded brackets. Angle Orthod. 2006 Mar;76(2):314-21. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0314:EORMOE]2.0.CO;2. |