Koo B C, Chung C H, Vanarsdall R L
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, USA.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Sep;116(3):346-51. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70248-9.
An in vitro study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of bracket placement for direct and indirect bonding techniques. Nineteen sets of duplicated Class II malocclusion models were divided into three groups: (1) one set for ideal bracket placement, (2) nine sets for direct bonding on mannequins, and (3) nine sets for indirect bonding. Both direct and indirect bonding were performed on all teeth except molars by nine faculty members from the Department of Orthodontics, University of Pennsylvania. The position of each bonded bracket from these two bonding groups was compared with that of the same tooth from the ideal group and to each other in terms of bracket height, mesiodistal position, and angulation. Our results indicated that both direct and indirect bonding techniques failed to execute ideal bracket placement. On individual teeth, there was no statistically significant difference in the accuracy of bracket placement between these two bonding techniques except for upper right second premolar and lower left central incisor, where indirect bonding yielded better results in bracket height (P < .05), and for lower left central incisor where indirect bonding was better in mesiodistal position (P < .05), and for upper right lateral incisor where direct bonding was closer to the ideal in angulation (P < .05). Overall, indirect bonding showed better bracket placement in bracket height (P < .05), whereas, no statistically significant difference was found between them regarding the angulation and mesiodistal position.
进行了一项体外研究，以评估直接和间接粘结技术中托槽放置的准确性。19套复制的II类错牙合模型被分为三组：（1）一组用于理想托槽放置，（2）九组用于在人体模型上进行直接粘结，（3）九组用于间接粘结。宾夕法尼亚大学正畸科的九名教员对除磨牙外的所有牙齿进行了直接和间接粘结。将这两个粘结组中每个粘结托槽的位置与理想组中同一颗牙齿的位置进行比较，并在托槽高度、近远中位置和角度方面相互比较。我们的结果表明，直接和间接粘结技术均未能实现理想的托槽放置。在个别牙齿上，除右上第二前磨牙和左下中切牙外，这两种粘结技术在托槽放置准确性方面没有统计学上的显著差异，在右上第二前磨牙处，间接粘结在托槽高度方面产生了更好的结果（P < 0.05），在左下中切牙处，间接粘结在近远中位置方面更好（P < 0.05），在右上侧切牙处，直接粘结在角度方面更接近理想情况（P < 0.05）。总体而言，间接粘结在托槽高度方面显示出更好的托槽放置效果（P < 0.05），而在角度和近远中位置方面，两者之间没有发现统计学上的显著差异。
