Survey on awareness and preference of ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists.


Journal

Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry
ISSN: 1989-5488
Titre abrégé: J Clin Exp Dent
Pays: Spain
ID NLM: 101603132

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Historique:
received: 26 02 2020
accepted: 13 04 2020
entrez: 9 9 2020
pubmed: 10 9 2020
medline: 10 9 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The objectives of this study was to evaluate the awareness of different ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists in the USA and the most commonly used debonding technique for ceramic bracket removal. A survey on preference for debonding and awareness of debonding techniques was emailed to 2,227 members of the American Association of Orthodontists (AAO). 119 orthodontists completed the survey. 111 responses were included in the study analysis of ceramic bracket users. The most common technique used was mechanical debonding. 86.5% used a specially designed bracket removing plier from the manufacturer. Overall, there were 59.5% of surveyed orthodontists who were aware of electrothermal debonding, 73% were unaware of ultrasonic debonding and 83.8% were unaware of laser debonding. There were more orthodontists with an affiliation with an academic institution aware of electrothermal debonding ( This survey showed that the majority of orthodontists who responded to the questionnaire were unaware of alternative debonding techniques of ceramic brackets. All orthodontists who use ceramic brackets utilized mechanical debonding technique.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The objectives of this study was to evaluate the awareness of different ceramic bracket debonding techniques among orthodontists in the USA and the most commonly used debonding technique for ceramic bracket removal.
MATERIAL AND METHODS METHODS
A survey on preference for debonding and awareness of debonding techniques was emailed to 2,227 members of the American Association of Orthodontists (AAO).
RESULTS RESULTS
119 orthodontists completed the survey. 111 responses were included in the study analysis of ceramic bracket users. The most common technique used was mechanical debonding. 86.5% used a specially designed bracket removing plier from the manufacturer. Overall, there were 59.5% of surveyed orthodontists who were aware of electrothermal debonding, 73% were unaware of ultrasonic debonding and 83.8% were unaware of laser debonding. There were more orthodontists with an affiliation with an academic institution aware of electrothermal debonding (
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
This survey showed that the majority of orthodontists who responded to the questionnaire were unaware of alternative debonding techniques of ceramic brackets. All orthodontists who use ceramic brackets utilized mechanical debonding technique.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32904974
doi: 10.4317/jced.56976
pii: 56976
pmc: PMC7462376
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

e656-e662

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2020 Medicina Oral S.L.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflicts of interest None declared.

Références

Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Sep;152(3):312-319
pubmed: 28863911
Lasers Med Sci. 2015 Sep;30(7):1835-41
pubmed: 25410302
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994 Sep;106(3):265-72
pubmed: 8074091
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Nov;132(5):680-6
pubmed: 18005844
Semin Orthod. 1997 Sep;3(3):178-88
pubmed: 9573879
Am J Orthod. 1986 Feb;89(2):141-5
pubmed: 3511716
J Clin Dent. 1991;2(4):92-6
pubmed: 1812905
J Orthod Sci. 2015 Oct-Dec;4(4):123-7
pubmed: 26952141
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990 Sep;98(3):263-73
pubmed: 2206042
J Lasers Med Sci. 2016 Winter;7(1):2-11
pubmed: 27330690
Am J Orthod. 1986 Jan;89(1):21-7
pubmed: 3510550
J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jul;8(7):ZC53-5
pubmed: 25177639
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 Jul;112(1):34-40
pubmed: 9228839
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990 Aug;98(2):145-53
pubmed: 2198800
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 Sep;108(3):262-6
pubmed: 7661142
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000 May;117(5):595-7
pubmed: 10799127
Angle Orthod. 1990 Winter;60(4):269-76
pubmed: 2256564
Br J Orthod. 1992 Aug;19(3):191-7
pubmed: 1294085
Lasers Med Sci. 2011 Sep;26(5):577-84
pubmed: 20658306

Auteurs

Aileen Y Ngan (AY)

Roseman University of Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, Henderson, NV, USA.

Prashanti Bollu (P)

Roseman University of Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, Henderson, NV, USA.

Kishore Chaudhry (K)

Roseman University of Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, Henderson, NV, USA.

Richard Stevens (R)

Roseman University of Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, Henderson, NV, USA.

Karthikeyan Subramani (K)

Roseman University of Health Sciences, College of Dental Medicine, Henderson, NV, USA.

Classifications MeSH