• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用高度托槽定位仪和布恩测量仪进行托槽放置准确性的比较。

Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement with height bracket positioning gauge and boone gauge.

作者信息

Mohammadi Amir, Moslemzadeh Seyed Hossein

机构信息

Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

出版信息

J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2011 Fall;5(4):111-8. doi: 10.5681/joddd.2011.026. Epub 2011 Dec 19.

DOI:10.5681/joddd.2011.026
PMID:22991618
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3442432/
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Diverse gauges have been used to measure and determine bracket height for correct bracket positioning. The aim of the present study was to determine and compare bracket positioning accuracy by using height bracket positioning gauge (HBPG) and Boone gauge (BG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nineteen sets of stone models were prepared from one patient. One set was employed to de-termine the ideal position of brackets, and the remaining nine pairs of sets for bracket placement by nine clinicians usingHBPG and BG. Teeth were then sectioned from the stone models and placed inside acrylic molds; photographs were takenand imported to a computer. In two groups, the position of each bonded bracket was compared in three aspects of vertical, mesiodistal and angular with the ideal position of every bracket. Finally, bracket positioning errors were measured.

RESULTS

Mann-Whitney U test demonstrated significant differences in the means ofvertical error between the HBPG group and BG groups (P<0.001), while there were no significant differences between mesiodistal and angular errors. Facto-rial ANOVA revealed that gauge and tooth type, and the position of tooth on the right and left side of the mouth play a ma-jor role in the rate of vertical error.

CONCLUSION

Vertical accuracy of bracket positioning by the use of HBPG is more than that by BG. However, there is no difference between two gauges in relation to the mesiodistal and angular errors.

摘要

背景与目的

为实现正确的托槽定位，人们使用了多种规格的工具来测量和确定托槽高度。本研究的目的是使用高度托槽定位规（HBPG）和布恩规（BG）来确定并比较托槽定位的准确性。

材料与方法

从一名患者制备了19套石膏模型。其中一套用于确定托槽的理想位置，其余9对模型由9名临床医生分别使用HBPG和BG进行托槽放置。然后从石膏模型上切下牙齿并放入丙烯酸模具中；拍摄照片并导入计算机。在两组中，将每个粘结托槽的位置在垂直、近远中和角度三个方面与每个托槽的理想位置进行比较。最后，测量托槽定位误差。

结果

曼-惠特尼U检验显示HBPG组和BG组在垂直误差均值上存在显著差异（P<0.001），而在近远中和角度误差方面无显著差异。析因方差分析表明，量具和牙齿类型以及牙齿在口腔左右侧的位置在垂直误差率中起主要作用。

结论

使用HBPG进行托槽定位的垂直准确性高于BG。然而，在近远中和角度误差方面，两种量具之间没有差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/1402c110316a/joddd-5-111-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7e1e67cd00e3/joddd-5-111-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/be943d1f2256/joddd-5-111-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7dcf1f51aa62/joddd-5-111-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/ff360a75083f/joddd-5-111-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/c544d5a5efa6/joddd-5-111-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/12aff2425022/joddd-5-111-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7d6d975467ea/joddd-5-111-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/3429ee0a7e28/joddd-5-111-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/f5a40af5e079/joddd-5-111-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/2d33f4028a79/joddd-5-111-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/1402c110316a/joddd-5-111-g011.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7e1e67cd00e3/joddd-5-111-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/be943d1f2256/joddd-5-111-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7dcf1f51aa62/joddd-5-111-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/ff360a75083f/joddd-5-111-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/c544d5a5efa6/joddd-5-111-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/12aff2425022/joddd-5-111-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/7d6d975467ea/joddd-5-111-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/3429ee0a7e28/joddd-5-111-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/f5a40af5e079/joddd-5-111-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/2d33f4028a79/joddd-5-111-g010.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9826/3442432/1402c110316a/joddd-5-111-g011.jpg

相似文献

1
Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement with height bracket positioning gauge and boone gauge.使用高度托槽定位仪和布恩测量仪进行托槽放置准确性的比较。
J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects. 2011 Fall;5(4):111-8. doi: 10.5681/joddd.2011.026. Epub 2011 Dec 19.
2
Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement between direct and indirect bonding techniques.直接粘结技术与间接粘结技术在托槽放置准确性方面的比较。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Sep;116(3):346-51. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70248-9.
3
Accuracy of bracket position using thermoplastic and 3D-printed indirect bonding trays.使用热塑型和 3D 打印间接粘接托盘的托槽定位准确性。
Int J Comput Dent. 2021 Jun 4;24(2):133-145.
4
A comparison of accuracy in bracket positioning between two techniques--localizing the centre of the clinical crown and measuring the distance from the incisal edge.两种技术在托槽定位准确性方面的比较——确定临床牙冠中心并测量切缘距离。
Eur J Orthod. 2007 Oct;29(5):430-6. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm037. Epub 2007 Jul 27.
5
Evaluation of the vertical accuracy of bracket placement with the Boone gauge.使用布恩测量仪评估托槽放置的垂直精度。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Nov;148(5):821-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.05.028.
6
Accuracy of positioning three types of self-ligating brackets compared with a conventionally ligating bracket.三种自锁托槽与传统结扎托槽的定位准确性比较。
J Orthod. 2012 Mar;39(1):34-42. doi: 10.1179/14653121226806.
7
Transfer accuracy of vinyl polysiloxane trays for indirect bonding.用于间接粘结的乙烯基聚硅氧烷托盘的转移精度。
Angle Orthod. 2016 May;86(3):468-74. doi: 10.2319/042415-279.1. Epub 2015 Sep 10.
8
An evaluation of the accuracy of bracket positioning with and without loupes using 3Shape Ortho Analyzer software.使用3Shape Ortho Analyzer软件评估使用和不使用放大镜时托槽定位的准确性。
J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2022 Sep 16;18(1):98-103. doi: 10.1016/j.jtumed.2022.08.010. eCollection 2023 Feb.
9
Accuracy of bracket positions with a CAD/CAM indirect bonding system in posterior teeth with different cusp heights.使用CAD/CAM间接粘结系统时，不同牙尖高度后牙托槽位置的准确性。
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Feb;153(2):298-307. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.06.017.
10
Accuracy of bracket placement by orthodontists and inexperienced dental students.正畸医生和缺乏经验的牙科学生放置托槽的准确性。
Aust Orthod J. 2007 Nov;23(2):96-103.

引用本文的文献

1
An evaluation of the accuracy of bracket positioning with and without loupes using 3Shape Ortho Analyzer software.使用3Shape Ortho Analyzer软件评估使用和不使用放大镜时托槽定位的准确性。
J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2022 Sep 16;18(1):98-103. doi: 10.1016/j.jtumed.2022.08.010. eCollection 2023 Feb.
2
Comparison of the accuracy of bracket positioning between direct and digital indirect bonding techniques in the maxillary arch: a three-dimensional study.上颌弓中直接和数字间接粘接技术定位托槽准确性的比较：一项三维研究。
Prog Orthod. 2022 Sep 5;23(1):31. doi: 10.1186/s40510-022-00426-3.
3
Useful design of custom-made mouthguard for athletes undergoing orthodontic treatment with brackets and wires.

本文引用的文献

1
Accuracy of bracket placement by orthodontists and inexperienced dental students.正畸医生和缺乏经验的牙科学生放置托槽的准确性。
Aust Orthod J. 2007 Nov;23(2):96-103.
2
A comparison of accuracy in bracket positioning between two techniques--localizing the centre of the clinical crown and measuring the distance from the incisal edge.两种技术在托槽定位准确性方面的比较——确定临床牙冠中心并测量切缘距离。
Eur J Orthod. 2007 Oct;29(5):430-6. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm037. Epub 2007 Jul 27.
3
TN3-a bracket positioning instrument.
为正在接受带托槽和钢丝正畸治疗的运动员定制护齿器的实用设计。
J Dent Sci. 2022 Jan;17(1):308-315. doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2021.03.010. Epub 2021 Apr 9.
4
Comparison of the accuracy of virtual and direct bonding of orthodontic accessories.正畸附件虚拟粘结与直接粘结准确性的比较。
Dental Press J Orthod. 2019 Sep 5;24(4):46-53. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.24.4.046-053.oar.
5
Evaluation of the prototype of a new bracket-positioning gauge.新型托槽定位测量仪原型的评估
Dental Press J Orthod. 2018 Mar-Apr;23(2):68-74. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.23.2.068-074.oar.
J Orthod. 2005 Jun;32(2):98-9. doi: 10.1179/146531205225020961.
4
An evaluation of slot size in orthodontic brackets--are standards as expected?正畸托槽槽沟尺寸的评估——是否符合预期标准？
Angle Orthod. 2004 Aug;74(4):450-3. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0450:AEOSSI>2.0.CO;2.
5
A randomized clinical trial comparing the accuracy of direct versus indirect bracket placement.一项比较直接与间接托槽放置准确性的随机临床试验。
J Orthod. 2004 Jun;31(2):132-7. doi: 10.1179/146531204225020427.
6
Indirect bonding simplified.间接粘结简化。
J Clin Orthod. 2003 May;37(5):248-51.
7
A new instrument for controlled bracket positioning.
J Clin Orthod. 2002 Apr;36(4):206-7.
8
The Burton approach to indirect bonding.
J Orthod. 2001 Dec;28(4):267-70. doi: 10.1093/ortho/28.4.267.
9
A new bracket-positioning instrument.
J Clin Orthod. 2000 Aug;34(8):482-3.
10
A precise and predictable laboratory procedure for indirect bonding.
J Clin Orthod. 2000 Dec;34(12):702-5.