Bonded versus banded first molar attachments: a randomized controlled clinical trial

References

• Zachrisson BU. A posttreatment evaluation of direct bonding in orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1977; 71: 173–89.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zachrisson BU, Brobakken BO. Clinical comparison of direct versus indirect bonding with different bracket types and adhesives. Am J Orthod 1978; 74: 62–77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Reynolds IR, van Fraunhofer JA. Direct bonding of orthodontic attachments to teeth: the relation of adhesive bond strength to gauze mesh size. Br J Orthod 1976; 3: 91–95.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thanos CE, Munholland T, Caputo AA. Adhesion of mesh-base direct-bonding brackets. Am J Orthod 1979; 75: 421–30.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maijer R, Smith DC. Variables influencing the bond strength of metal orthodontic bracket bases. Am J Orthod 1981; 79: 20–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Regan D, van Noort R. Bond strengths of two integral bracket-base combinations: an in vitro comparison with foil mesh. Eur J Orthod 1989; 11: 144–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston CD, Burden DJ, Hussey DL, Mitchell CC. Bonding to molars—the effect of etch time (an in vitro study). Eur J Orthod 1998; 20: 195–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattick CR, Hobson RS. A comparative micro-topographic study of the buccal enamel of different tooth types. J Orthod 2000; 27: 143–48.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Knox J, Hubsch P, Jones ML, Middleton J. Influence of bracket base design on the strength of the bracket-cement interface. J Orthod 2000; 27: 249–54.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Banks PA. Bond failure rates – mini-twin versus standard brackets. British Orthodontic Society Clinical Effectiveness Working Party Newsletter. 2003; 16: 4.
   Google Scholar
• Hobson RS, McCabe JF, Hogg SD. Bond strength to surface enamel for different tooth types. Dent Mater 2001; 17: 184–89.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eliades T, Brantley WA. The inappropriateness of conventional orthodontic bond strength assessment protocols. Eur J Orthod 2000; 22: 13–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickett KL, Sadowsky PL, Jacobsen A, Lacefield W. Orthodontic in vivo bond strength: comparison with in vitro results. Angle Orthod 2001; 71: 141–48.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millett DT, McCabe JF. Orthodontic bonding with glass ionomer cement—a review. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18: 385–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sunna S, Rock WP. Clinical performance of orthodontic brackets and adhesive systems: a randomized clinical trial. Br J Orthod 1998; 25: 283–87.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fricker JP, McLachlan MD. Clinical studies of glass ionomer cements. Part 1—a twelve month clinical study comparing zinc phosphate cement to glass ionomer. Aust Orthod J 1985; 9: 179–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Millett DT, Gordon PH. The performance of first molar orthodontic bands cemented with glass ionomer cement—a retrospective analysis. Br J Orthod 1992; 19: 215–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maijer R, Smith DC. A comparison between zinc phosphate and glass ionomer cement in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988; 93: 27–39.
   Google Scholar
• Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical study comparing four glass ionomer cements for the cementation of orthodontic molar bands. Aust Orthod J 1989; 11: 10–13.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stirrups DR. A comparative clinical trial of a glass ionomer and a zinc phosphate cement for securing orthodontic bands. Br J Orthod 1991; 18: 15–20.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fricker JP. A 12-month clinical comparison of resin-modified light-activated adhesives for the cementation of orthodontic molar bands. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 112: 239–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millett DT, McCabe JF, Bennett TG, Carter NE, Gordon PH. The effect of sandblasting on the retention of first molar bands cemented with glass ionomer cement. Br J Orthod 1995; 22: 161–69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hodges SJ, Gilthorpe MS, Hunt NP. The effect of microetching on the retention of orthodontic molar bands: a clinical trial. Eur J Orthod 2001; 23: 91–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston CD, McSherry PF. The effects of sandblasting on the bond strength of molar attachments—an in vitro study. Eur J Orthod 1999; 21: 311–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geiger AM, Gorelick L, Gwinnett AJ. Bond failure rates of facial and lingual attachments. J Clin Orthod 1983; 17: 165–69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Millett DT, Hallgren A, Fornell A, Robertson M. Bonded molar tubes: a retrospective evaluation of clinical performance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115: 667–74.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandis N, Christensen L, Eliades T. Long-term clinical failure rate of molar tubes bonded with a self-etching primer. Angle Orthod 2005; 75: 1000–2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandall NA, Millett DT, Mattick CR, Hickman J, Worthington HV, Macfarlane TV. Orthodontic adhesives: a systematic review. J Orthod 2002; 29: 205–10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Årtun J, Bergland S. Clinical trials with crystal growth conditioning as an alternative to acid etch enamel pre-treatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 333–40.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Phillimore P, Beattie A, Townsend P. Widening inequality of health in Northern England, 1981–91. BMJ 1994; 308: 1125–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norman P. Calculating the Townsend index for the 2001 Census, 2005. Available at: http://census.ac.uk/cdu/2001/downloads/Calculating_2001_deprivation.doc
   Google Scholar
• 2001 Census. Standard area statistics (England and Wales). Data service provider: Census Dissemination Unit, MIMAS (University of Manchester); service funder: Economic and Social Research Council (with the support of the Joint Information Systems Committee); data collection funder: Office for National Statistics; original data creator: Office for National Statistics; depositor: office for national statistics; registrar: census registration service (University of Essex).
   Google Scholar
• Donner A, Klar N. Design and analysis of cluster randomisation trials in health research. London: Arnold, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Cox DR. Regression models and life tables (with discussions). J R Stat Soc 1972; 34: 187–220.
   Google Scholar
• Kerry SM, Bland JM. Sample size in cluster randomisation. BMJ 1998; 316: 549.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar