ArticleTurkish journal of orthodontics2023
Evaluation of the Flash-Free Adhesive System for a 6-month Period: A Split-Mouth Trial.
Article in Turkish journal of orthodontics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the adhesive pre-coated (APC) flash-free (FF) appliance system (3M Unitek) with an operator-coated (OC) system (Transbond XT Light Cure Adhesive Paste; 3M Unitek) in terms of bond failure, bracket survival, and chair time. Methods: This single-center study was planned with 30 non-extraction patients, 22 females and 8 males with an average age of 17 years and 5 months. A split-mouth design was used, and bonding time, failed brackets, reasons for failure, and adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were noted. The data were analyzed with the chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, log-rank, and Mann-Whitney U tests. Results: OC and FF adhesive-coated brackets demonstrated bond failure rates of 0.7% and 3.0%, respectively. Failure rates and survival rates presented a statistically significant difference (p=0.033). Although higher bond failure for the lower arch along with higher bond failure for the incisor teeth compared with the premolar teeth were found, these findings were not statistically significant (p=0.128; p=0.261, respectively). The effect of gender on the bond failure rate (p=0.463) and survival rate (p=0.473) was not statistically significant. A significant difference was obtained for the ARI scores (p=0.011). The bonding time for each bracket type (64.43 seconds for FF versus 98.97 seconds for OC) demonstrated a significant difference (p=0.174). Conclusion: The bond failure rate was higher for the FF APC brackets, but the chair time reduction during bonding was recorded. Therefore, it seems that FF APC brackets are promising. Trial registration: ISRCTNand ISRCTN26731749. Registered October 7, 2020-Retrospectively registered, https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN26731749.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.