HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Russell, J. S. Articles by Mitchell, L. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Russell, J. S. Articles by Mitchell, L.

The efficacy of a plasma arc light in orthodontic bonding: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Department of Orthodontics, St Luke’s Hospital, Bradford, UK

Andrew Blance

Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

Laura Mitchell

Department of Orthodontics, St Luke’s Hospital, Bradford, UK

Address for correspondence: Joanne Russell, Orthodontic Department, James Cook University Hospital, Marton Road, Middlesborough, TS43BW, UK. Email: joannesrussell{at}yahoo.co.uk

	Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the clinical performance of a plasma arc light (Ortho LITE, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA) against a conventional tungsten–quartz halogen curing light (Visilux 2, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA) for direct orthodontic bonding.

Design: A single centre prospective randomized controlled clinical trial.

Setting: The Orthodontic Department at St Luke’s Hospital, Bradford, UK.

Subjects and methods: Forty-three consecutive patients requiring fixed appliances from the orthodontic waiting list. A split mouth technique was adopted; with quadrants randomly assigned to either the plasma arc light or the conventional halogen curing light and bonded directly with APC pre-adjusted edgewise brackets (3M Unitek, Monrovia, CA, USA).

Main outcome measure: Bracket failures.

Secondary outcome measures: Time taken to bond-up the appliances, patient sensitivity or discomfort during curing and time to replace failed brackets were investigated.

Results: No statistically significant difference in bracket failure rates over the full course of treatment was found between the plasma arc light (6.7%; 95% CI 4.5–10.0) and the halogen curing light (9.5%; 95% CI 6.8–13.1). There was no statistically significant difference in bracket survival times. The bond-up times were typically reduced by 204 seconds per patient with the plasma arc light. There were no differences in patient reported sensitivity or discomfort or rebond times.

Conclusion: The plasma arc light is a viable clinical alternative to the conventional halogen curing light with benefits for both the clinician and patient due to reduced bonding times.

Key words: Plasma arc light, conventional tungsten–quartz halogen light, orthodontic bonding, randomized controlled clinical trial