Comparison of the accuracy of bracket placement between direct and indirect bonding techniques.

An in vitro study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of bracket placement for direct and indirect bonding techniques. Nineteen sets of duplicated Class II malocclusion models were divided into three groups: (1) one set for ideal bracket placement, (2) nine sets for direct bonding on mannequins, and (3) nine sets for indirect bonding. Both direct and indirect bonding were performed on all teeth except molars by nine faculty members from the Department of Orthodontics, University of Pennsylvania. The position of each bonded bracket from these two bonding groups was compared with that of the same tooth from the ideal group and to each other in terms of bracket height, mesiodistal position, and angulation. Our results indicated that both direct and indirect bonding techniques failed to execute ideal bracket placement. On individual teeth, there was no statistically significant difference in the accuracy of bracket placement between these two bonding techniques except for upper right second premolar and lower left central incisor, where indirect bonding yielded better results in bracket height (P < .05), and for lower left central incisor where indirect bonding was better in mesiodistal position (P < .05), and for upper right lateral incisor where direct bonding was closer to the ideal in angulation (P < .05). Overall, indirect bonding showed better bracket placement in bracket height (P < .05), whereas, no statistically significant difference was found between them regarding the angulation and mesiodistal position.