Original Research Article
Year: 2020 | Month: July-September | Volume: 5 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 251-259
Molar Banding or Bonding? What do Orthodontists prefer in Routine Clinical Practice?
Lishoy Rodrigues1, Bhushan Jawale2, Apurva Kaluskkar3, Bhagyashree Jadhav4, Aljeeta Kadam5, Almas Shaikh6, Kashmira Gurav7, Tushar Borchate 8
1Post Graduate Resident, 2Professor,
Dept. of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Sinhgad, Pune, Maharashtra, India
3Private Practitioner, Pune, Maharashtra, India
4Lecturer, Dept. of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, BVP Dental College and Hospital, Sinhgad, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
5Private Practitioner, Huntly Dental Practice, Scotland, United Kingdom
6Post Graduate Resident, Dept. of Prosthodontics and Implantology, Government Dental College and Hospital, Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
7Post Graduate Resident, Dept. of Public Health Dentistry, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Sinhgad, Pune, Maharashtra, India
8Post Graduate Resident, Dept. of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics, Sinhgad Dental College and Hospital, Sinhgad, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Corresponding Author: Lishoy Rodrigues
ABSTRACT
Background: Whether to band molars or bond them during Orthodontic treatment has now become a dilemma to many Orthodontists practicing across the country. Both banding and bonding have their pros and cons.The terminal attachments of fixed appliances are placed on molar teeth; most commonly the first permanent molars. These attachments can take the form of a cemented molar band or a bonded molar tube. The active phase of fixed orthodontic appliance treatment takes an average of two years to complete. To reduce the likelihood of emergency visits, improve patient experience and avoid lengthy treatment times it is important that these attachments have low failure rates.
Aim: This questionnaire based survey aims to evaluate whether orthodontists prefer molar banding or bonding in their routine clinical practice.
Methodology: A sample of 157 participants (orthodontists) was taken after assessing the sample size within the age group of 27 - 50 years of age. The participants comprised of orthodontists practicing in various parts of India. A Questionnaire was created on Google forms and circulated to participants using various social media platforms.The data of responses of participants were analyzed and evaluated with the help of pie charts.
Results: This survey analyzed Orthodontists' choice during banding / bonding of molars and tried to evaluate the common problems faced during either banding molars or bonding them with bondable molar tubes. Majority of Orthodontists preferred bondable molar tubes over banding in routine orthodontic practice. The most common problem faced by majority orthodontists associated with banding was increased chair-side time and increased gingival impingement and irritation, whereas the most common problem faced by them associated with bonding with bondable molar tubes was increased tendency of breakages. Majority of Orthodontists felt that banding in orthodontics was unnecessary as it took up a lot of clinical time and they also asserted that in their experience, frequency of breakages were mostly associated with bondable tubes than bands. However the most striking and highlighting feature of this study was that participants believed that banding molars did not have any added advantage over using bondable molar tubes.
Conclusion: This questionnaire based survey clearly helped in proving that Orthodontists preferred using bondable molar tubes over molar banding in their routine clinical practice as they believed that it saved a lot of clinical time, provided benefits that outweighed its drawbacks and moreover were in no way inferior to molar banding when used during routine fixed orthodontic treatment.
Keywords: Molar Banding, Molar Bonding, Orthodontist preference, Clinical practice, Questionnaire, Survey