Ahmed Tamzid, Rahman Norma Ab, Alam Mohammad Khursheed
Orthodontics Unit, School of Dental Sciences (PPSG), Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kota Bharu, Kelantan, Malaysia.
Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Eur J Dent. 2018 Oct-Dec;12(4):602-609. doi: 10.4103/ejd.ejd_22_18.
The aim of this study was to systematically review the available studies measuring the bond strength of orthodontic bracket-adhesive system under different experimental conditions . Literature search was performed in four different databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus using the keywords - bond strength, orthodontic brackets, bracket-adhesive, and . A total of six full-text articles were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of our study after a careful assessment by the two independent reviewers. Data selection was performed by following PRISMA 2009 guidelines. Five of the selected studies were clinical trials; one study was a randomized clinical trial. From each of the selected articles, the following data were extracted - number of samples, with the type of tooth involved materials under experiment methods of measurement, the time interval between bonding and debonding orthodontic brackets, mode of force application, and the bond strength results with the overall outcome. The methodological quality assessment of each article was done by the modified Downs and Black checklist method. The qualitative analyses were done by two independent reviewers. Conflicting issues were resolved in a consensus meeting by consulting the third reviewer (MKA). Meta-analysis could not be performed due to the lack of homogenous study results. The review reached no real conclusion apart from the lack of efforts to clinically evaluate the bonding efficiency of a wide range of orthodontic bracket-adhesive systems in terms of debonding force compared to laboratory-based and studies.
本研究的目的是系统回顾在不同实验条件下测量正畸托槽 - 粘结剂系统粘结强度的现有研究。使用关键词“粘结强度”“正畸托槽”“托槽 - 粘结剂”等在四个不同数据库（PubMed、科学网、Cochrane和Scopus）中进行文献检索。在两位独立评审员仔细评估后，根据我们研究的纳入和排除标准共选出六篇全文文章。数据选择遵循PRISMA 2009指南进行。所选研究中有五项为临床试验；一项研究为随机临床试验。从每篇所选文章中提取以下数据——样本数量、涉及的牙齿类型、实验材料、测量方法、正畸托槽粘结与脱粘之间的时间间隔、力的施加方式以及粘结强度结果和总体结果。每篇文章的方法学质量评估采用改良的唐斯和布莱克清单法。定性分析由两位独立评审员进行。有冲突的问题在共识会议上通过咨询第三位评审员（MKA）解决。由于缺乏同质的研究结果，无法进行荟萃分析。除了与基于实验室的研究相比，在临床评估多种正畸托槽 - 粘结剂系统在脱粘力方面的粘结效率缺乏努力外，该综述没有得出实际结论。
