Abstract
BackgroundThe direct and indirect bonding techniques are commonly used in orthodontic treatment. The differences of the two techniques deserve evidence-based study.Materials and methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs), wherein direct and indirect bonding techniques were used in orthodontic patients were considered. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant articles published up to December 2018. Grey literature was also searched. Two authors performed data extraction independently and in duplicate using the data collection form. The included trials were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool.ResultsOf the 1557 studies screened, 42 full articles were scrutinized and assessed for eligibility. Eight RCTs (247 participants) were finally included for the analyses. The qualitative synthesis showed that no significant difference existed in the accuracy of bracket placement and oral hygiene status between the two bonding techniques. The indirect bonding was found to involve less chairside time but more total working time compared with the direct bonding. The meta-analysis on bond failure rate demonstrated no significant difference between the direct and indirect bonding (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.78–1.64, I2 = 22%, P = 0.50). Consistent results were obtained in the subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses.ConclusionWeak evidence suggested that the direct and indirect bonding techniques had no significant difference in bracket placement accuracy, oral hygiene status and bond failure rate, for bonding orthodontic brackets. The indirect bonding might require less chairside time but more total working time in comparison with the direct bonding technique. High-quality well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed before a conclusive recommendation could be made.
Highlights
The direct and indirect bonding techniques are commonly used in orthodontic treatment
The meta-analysis on bond failure rate demonstrated no significant difference between the direct and indirect bonding (RR = 1.13, 95% 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.78–1.64, I2 = 22%, P = 0.50)
Weak evidence suggested that the direct and indirect bonding techniques had no significant difference in bracket placement accuracy, oral hygiene status and bond failure rate, for bonding orthodontic brackets
Summary
The direct and indirect bonding techniques are commonly used in orthodontic treatment. The indirect bonding technique was first proposed in 1972 for improving the accuracy of orthodontic bracket positioning [3, 4]. The latter mainly includes two stages, i.e. the laboratory stage and the clinical stage. Effectiveness (bracket placement accuracy), efficiency (total working time and chairside time) and adverse effects (oral hygiene status and bond failure rate) of the two techniques have been traced since they were proposed. Uncertainty remains on whether it acquires higher placement accuracy than direct bonding does for clinical treatment. The bond failure has been found to be associated with bonding technique (direct/indirect) [18]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
