## 4 Discussion
In one case series, aerosols generated by ultrasonic handpieces during procedures on a patient with an active infection led to contamination of the dentist and assistant within the clinic. These findings underscore the heightened vulnerability of dental professionals and their staff to infectious diseases [27]. The use of methods that minimize microbial contamination, such as rubber dam isolation, can significantly reduce the risk of such exposures, ensuring a safer environment for both dental professionals and patients. This highlights the critical importance of employing effective isolation techniques to prevent the transmission of infectious diseases in dental settings [28]. In the traditionally preferred direct bonding method, the placement of brackets can be challenging, especially in the posterior region, due to the presence of cheeks, saliva, and the use of cotton and suction for isolation, which can limit visibility. Due to these obstructions, determining the long axis and marginal edge fit of the bracket can be challenging. In orthodontic measurements made by the orthodontist using a gauge, the margin of error may increase, and verifying and visualizing the bracket's position with a mirror can become more difficult [28]. In our study, deviations exceeding 0.5 mm and clinically significant were found in teeth numbers 35 and 45 for the X-axis and Y-axis in both RDI and TI groups. In the RDI group, deviations exceeding 0.5 mm and clinically significant were also observed for the Y-axis in teeth numbers 34 and 44. In their study, [PERSON] et al. [29], found more errors in bracket positions for posterior teeth than anterior teeth and explained the reason as visual difficulty in the posterior region. [PERSON] and [PERSON] saw [30] more rotation in second premolar teeth than first premolar teeth. In teeth with rotation, the bracket can be slightly shifted in the direction of rotation for excessive correction [31]. This situation may have appeared as a mesiodistal positional error in our study. Additionally, the presence [32; 33] of different crown variations in premolar teeth may have increased the deviation values. When placing brackets on canine and premolar teeth, the brackets should be kept parallel to the occlusal plane using a gauge [31]. During this procedure, a small mistake or difficulty in determining the occlusal plane can lead to incorrect gauge usage. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [34] reported that factors such as gingival hyperplasia, gingival thickness, the presence of rotation, and the tooth's location in the vestibular or palatal area can affect the bracket's position. Errors may have occurred depending on the presence of one or several of these factors. In a study conducted by [PERSON] et al. [35], a high rate of bracket breakage in premolar brackets was found, and they attributed this to moisture contamination. Experienced clinicians, being aware of the risk of moisture contamination, may experience stress during the bracket placement process. This can lead to a situation where they are unable to allocate sufficient time for bracket positioning. In our study, deviations exceeding 2 degrees were observed in teeth numbers 35 and 45 for the XY plane and in all teeth for the XZ and YZ planes. These deviations were clinically significant. The deviations exceeding 2 degrees observed in the XY plane are consistent with findings in other studies, indicating a parallel trend [29; 36]. When reviewing the literature, it can be observed that there is limited information available regarding the comparison of angular values in the XZ and YZ planes [37; 38]. [PERSON] et al. [38] intersected XZ and YZ angular evaluations, grouping them as canine, premolar, and molar. All the results obtained are below 2 degrees. They performed bracketing on the guide obtained with a 3D scanner. The margin of error is at a minimum level. The methodological differences in this study may affect the reliability of comparisons.