Reporting checklist for cohort study.

<div> Objective This study aims to evaluate the clinical transfer accuracy of partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays based on three-dimensional (3D) printed models for lingual bracket indirect bonding. Materials and methods Thirty-two consecutive patients receiving lingual orthodontic treatment were enrolled. Digital models with ideal bracket positions were 3D-printed, followed by fabrication of partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays. Digital impressions captured actual bracket positions and were compared to the ideal positions. One-tailed t-tests assessed if errors were within clinically acceptable thresholds of 0.5 mm for linear measurements and 2° for angular measurements. Results Mean bracket transfer errors were 0.052 mm, 0.076 mm, 0.106 mm, 0.795°, 1.344°, and 2.485° for mesiodistal, buccolingual, occlusogingival, rotation, tip, and torque, respectively. Transfer errors were statistically below the clinically acceptable thresholds for all dimensions except torque. Frequencies of acceptable transfer errors were 100%, 100%, 99.3%, 93.1%, 78.3%, and 54.0%, respectively. Conclusion Partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays with 3D-printed models transfer lingual brackets with high accuracy in the mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions, rotation, and tip. However, the transfer of torque remains questionable. </div>

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0316208.s002
Primary Topic
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reporting checklist for cohort study.

Figshare
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
article

Reporting checklist for cohort study.

article en

Abstract

<div> Objective This study aims to evaluate the clinical transfer accuracy of partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays based on three-dimensional (3D) printed models for lingual bracket indirect bonding. Materials and methods Thirty-two consecutive patients receiving lingual orthodontic treatment were enrolled. Digital models with ideal bracket positions were 3D-printed, followed by fabrication of partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays. Digital impressions captured actual bracket positions and were compared to the ideal positions. One-tailed t-tests assessed if errors were within clinically acceptable thresholds of 0.5 mm for linear measurements and 2° for angular measurements. Results Mean bracket transfer errors were 0.052 mm, 0.076 mm, 0.106 mm, 0.795°, 1.344°, and 2.485° for mesiodistal, buccolingual, occlusogingival, rotation, tip, and torque, respectively. Transfer errors were statistically below the clinically acceptable thresholds for all dimensions except torque. Frequencies of acceptable transfer errors were 100%, 100%, 99.3%, 93.1%, 78.3%, and 54.0%, respectively. Conclusion Partially enclosed single hard vacuum-formed trays with 3D-printed models transfer lingual brackets with high accuracy in the mesiodistal, buccolingual, and occlusogingival dimensions, rotation, and tip. However, the transfer of torque remains questionable. </div>

Figshare
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.