Evaluation of Time Consumption for Debonding Brackets Using Different Techniques: A Hospital-Based Study

• Main Authors: Neelutpal Bora, Putul Mahanta, Ranjumoni Konwar, Bharati Basumatari, Chiranjita Phukan, Deepjyoti Kalita, Senjam Gojendra Singh, Sangeeta Deka
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hindawi Limited 2021-01-01
• Series: Journal of Healthcare Engineering
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/5567863

Background and Objectives. The debonding procedures of brackets in orthodontics cause a different amount of time loss and enamel damage. The current research assesses and equates the time consumption for bracket debonding using four different techniques. Materials and Methods. A total of 80 human premolars were included in this study. The samples were first arranged following a standard protocol for bracketing and then debonded using the ultrasonic scaler (US), debonding plier (DP), ligature cutter (LC), and thermal method (TM). Depending on the technique applied for debonding, the specimens were randomly divided into four groups with 20 samples, each keeping a 1 : 1 ratio. During the debonding process, the time taken for each bracket removal was recorded using a stopwatch. To assess the difference in mean time required for debonding among the four techniques, one-way ANOVA test was applied along with Tukey’s HSD to compare the two methods. Results. The time range and the mean time required for the four techniques analyzed show that the DP method has the highest range of time needed for debonding with 0.97–2.56 seconds, while LC methods have the least time range taking 0.46 to 1.79 seconds. TM’s mean time to debond is the highest at 1.5880 seconds. LC method has the lowest mean debonding time of 0.9880 seconds. The one-way ANOVA test has shown the mean debonding time required by the four techniques to be significantly different (p<0.001). Tukey’s HSD multiple comparisons also show that the mean time to debond using the LC method is substantially less than the other three methods (p<0.001). Conclusion. The mean debonding time for the TM was substantially the highest, followed by the US and DP. Debonding with the LC technique required the least time. This study shows some limelight towards the effectiveness of the LC method as it is the least time-consuming technique.