Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38411719›Full record

ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2025

Influence of the design of 3D-printed indirect bonding trays and experience of the clinician on the accuracy of bracket placement.

Hisham Sabbagh, Lea Hoffmann, Andrea Wichelhaus, Andreas Kessler

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hisham SabbaghDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336, Munich, Germany. hisham.sabbagh@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Lea HoffmannDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Andrea WichelhausDepartment of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
Andreas KesslerDepartment of Conservative Dentistry and Periodontology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Goethestraße 70, 80336, Munich, Germany.
LMU Klinikum · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim was to investigate the influence of three different three-dimensional (3D)-printed bonding tray designs and professional experience on accuracy of indirect bracket placement.

methodsVirtual bracket placement was performed on a scanned dental model using OnyxCeph software (Image Instruments, Chemnitz, Germany). Three different designs for indirect bonding trays (open, semi-open, and closed design) were created and produced using a 3D printer. To analyze the influence of professional experience, one of the three tray designs was produced twice. In this case, bracket placement was performed by an inexperienced dentist. Bracket positions were scanned after the indirect bonding procedure. Linear and angular transfer errors were measured. Significant differences between the target and actual situation were analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis and χ

resultsAll bonding tray designs resulted in comparable results. The results of the unexperienced dentist showed significantly higher deviations than those for the experienced orthodontist in the torque direction. However, the mean values were comparable. The open tray design exceeded the clinically acceptable limits of 0.25 mm and 1° more often. The inexperienced dentist exceeded these limits significantly more often than the experienced orthodontist in the vertical and torque direction. The immediate bracket loss rate showed no significant differences between the different tray designs. Significantly more bracket losses were observed for the inexperienced dentist during the procedure compared to the experienced orthodontist.

conclusionsThe bonding tray design and professional experience had an influence on the exceedance of clinically relevant limits of positioning accuracy and on the bracket loss rate.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceDental BondingOrthodontic BracketsPrinting, Three-DimensionalEquipment DesignHumansModels, DentalReproducibility of Results3D printingBracket placement accuracyLearning curveOrthodontic bracketsTray design

Identifiers

PMID38411719
PMCPMC12540505
OpenAlexW4392199372

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.