Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems

Objective: To evaluate and compare the shear bond strengths (SBS) and bracket failure rates (BFR) of orthodontic brackets bonded with Light Cure adhesive against those bonded with Self Cure adhesive. Material and Methods: The study had in vitro and in vivo parts. In the in vitro part to determine SB...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Azubuike Chukwubumnobi Okeke, Ifeoma Utomi, Nkiruka Folaranmi
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Association of Support to Oral Health Research (APESB) 2022-12-01
Series:Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada
Subjects:
Online Access:https://revista.uepb.edu.br/PBOCI/article/view/1623
_version_ 1811302540017401856
author Azubuike Chukwubumnobi Okeke
Ifeoma Utomi
Nkiruka Folaranmi
author_facet Azubuike Chukwubumnobi Okeke
Ifeoma Utomi
Nkiruka Folaranmi
author_sort Azubuike Chukwubumnobi Okeke
collection DOAJ
description Objective: To evaluate and compare the shear bond strengths (SBS) and bracket failure rates (BFR) of orthodontic brackets bonded with Light Cure adhesive against those bonded with Self Cure adhesive. Material and Methods: The study had in vitro and in vivo parts. In the in vitro part to determine SBS of Light Bond(LB)(R) and Rely.a.Bond(RB)(R) adhesives used in bonding brackets to 88 extracted teeth, each adhesive type was used to bond 44 brackets. The clinical study was conducted to determine the BFR of the LB(R) and RB(R) adhesives by bonding 256 teeth using each adhesive type. A standardized bonding procedure was followed in both the in vitro and in vivo parts of the study. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, independent t-test, chi-square, and Pearson Correlation statistics. A p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. SPSS version 21.0 was used to analyze the data generated. Results: There was a significantly higher mean SBS 10.6MPa for LB(R) adhesive than the 7.0MPa of the RB(R) adhesive. In the in vivo study, (LB)(R) had a greater but not significant BFR of 9.0% than RB(R) (8.0%). No significant relationship existed between the SBS of either adhesive type (as determined in vitro) and their BFR in vivo. Conclusion: Higher SBS of LB(R) did not translate to less BFR in the clinic, nor did a lower SBS of RB(R) translate to more BFR in the clinic.
first_indexed 2024-04-13T07:29:51Z
format Article
id doaj.art-1390cd5813fc4d85b412ef24a4964985
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1519-0501
1983-4632
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-13T07:29:51Z
publishDate 2022-12-01
publisher Association of Support to Oral Health Research (APESB)
record_format Article
series Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada
spelling doaj.art-1390cd5813fc4d85b412ef24a49649852022-12-22T02:56:22ZengAssociation of Support to Oral Health Research (APESB)Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada1519-05011983-46322022-12-0122Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive SystemsAzubuike Chukwubumnobi OkekeIfeoma UtomiNkiruka FolaranmiObjective: To evaluate and compare the shear bond strengths (SBS) and bracket failure rates (BFR) of orthodontic brackets bonded with Light Cure adhesive against those bonded with Self Cure adhesive. Material and Methods: The study had in vitro and in vivo parts. In the in vitro part to determine SBS of Light Bond(LB)(R) and Rely.a.Bond(RB)(R) adhesives used in bonding brackets to 88 extracted teeth, each adhesive type was used to bond 44 brackets. The clinical study was conducted to determine the BFR of the LB(R) and RB(R) adhesives by bonding 256 teeth using each adhesive type. A standardized bonding procedure was followed in both the in vitro and in vivo parts of the study. Data were analyzed using frequency, percentage, mean, independent t-test, chi-square, and Pearson Correlation statistics. A p-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered significant. SPSS version 21.0 was used to analyze the data generated. Results: There was a significantly higher mean SBS 10.6MPa for LB(R) adhesive than the 7.0MPa of the RB(R) adhesive. In the in vivo study, (LB)(R) had a greater but not significant BFR of 9.0% than RB(R) (8.0%). No significant relationship existed between the SBS of either adhesive type (as determined in vitro) and their BFR in vivo. Conclusion: Higher SBS of LB(R) did not translate to less BFR in the clinic, nor did a lower SBS of RB(R) translate to more BFR in the clinic. https://revista.uepb.edu.br/PBOCI/article/view/1623Orthodontic BracketsPatientsDental BondingDental Materials
spellingShingle Azubuike Chukwubumnobi Okeke
Ifeoma Utomi
Nkiruka Folaranmi
Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada
Orthodontic Brackets
Patients
Dental Bonding
Dental Materials
title Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
title_full Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
title_fullStr Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
title_short Comparative Study of the Shear Bond Strengths and Bracket Failure Rates of Two Orthodontic Adhesive Systems
title_sort comparative study of the shear bond strengths and bracket failure rates of two orthodontic adhesive systems
topic Orthodontic Brackets
Patients
Dental Bonding
Dental Materials
url https://revista.uepb.edu.br/PBOCI/article/view/1623
work_keys_str_mv AT azubuikechukwubumnobiokeke comparativestudyoftheshearbondstrengthsandbracketfailureratesoftwoorthodonticadhesivesystems
AT ifeomautomi comparativestudyoftheshearbondstrengthsandbracketfailureratesoftwoorthodonticadhesivesystems
AT nkirukafolaranmi comparativestudyoftheshearbondstrengthsandbracketfailureratesoftwoorthodonticadhesivesystems