There was insufficient evidence to assess the effect of bonding modality on demineralization rates .
CONCLUSIONS There is weak evidence indicating higher odds of failure with self-etch primer than acid etch over 12 months in orthodontic patients , and there is strong evidence that a self-etch primer is likely to result in a modest time savings ( 8 minutes for full bonding ) compared with acid etch
INTRODUCTION The use of self-etch primers has increased steadily because of their time savings and greater simplicity ; however , overall benefits and potential disadvantages and harms have not been assessed systematic ally .
In this study , we review ed r and omized controlled trials to assess the risk of attachment failure , bonding time , and demineralization adjacent to attachments between 1-stage ( self-etch ) and 2-stage ( acid etch ) bonding in orthodontic patients over a minimum follow-up period of 12 months .
A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing ‘One-Step’ and ‘Two-Step’ Orthodontic Bonding Systems
Objective The primary objective of this prospect i ve clinical trial was to assess the clinical bond failure rates of orthodontic brackets bonded using a self-etching primer ( SEP ) , compared with brackets bonded using a conventional acid-etched technique with control adhesive ( Transbond ™ ) . A secondary aim was to investigate whether characteristics of the operator , patient or tooth bonded had any influence on bracket failure . Design Single-centre r and omized controlled clinical trial . Thirty-four patients were bonded , each being r and omly assigned to either the test or control adhesive . Setting NHS Hospital Orthodontic Department , Chester , UK . Subjects Orthodontic patients requiring fixed appliance treatment . Main outcome measures Bond failure . Main outcome results Failure rates over the initial 6-month period were 2.0 % ( Transbond ™ ) and 1.7 % ( SEP ) with no statistically significant difference between the two groups . Over the duration of the fixed appliance treatment , bond failure rates increased , but remained acceptable at 7.4 % ( TB ) and 7.0 % ( SEP ) , respectively . When operator , patient and tooth characteristics were analysed , only the bracket location was found to be significant . Maxillary brackets were more likely to fail than m and ibular brackets ( RR 0.47 % ; 95 % CI 0.22 , 1.03 ) . The failure rate for brackets in our study was low when compared with previous studies . Conclusions Both the acid-etched control and self-etching primer in combination with adhesive pre-coated brackets were successful for clinical bonding . Their combined failure rate was lower than that reported in similar trials
There was insufficient evidence to assess the effect of bonding modality on demineralization rates .
CONCLUSIONS There is weak evidence indicating higher odds of failure with self-etch primer than acid etch over 12 months in orthodontic patients , and there is strong evidence that a self-etch primer is likely to result in a modest time savings ( 8 minutes for full bonding ) compared with acid etch
INTRODUCTION The use of self-etch primers has increased steadily because of their time savings and greater simplicity ; however , overall benefits and potential disadvantages and harms have not been assessed systematic ally .
In this study , we review ed r and omized controlled trials to assess the risk of attachment failure , bonding time , and demineralization adjacent to attachments between 1-stage ( self-etch ) and 2-stage ( acid etch ) bonding in orthodontic patients over a minimum follow-up period of 12 months .