SmartClip versus conventional twin brackets for initial alignment: is there a difference?
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of SmartClip brackets and conventional twin brackets for initial alignment of the lower arch.


METHODS
Fifty-eight patients participated in this prospective trial. The patients were assigned alternately to either a group treated with SmartClip MBT prescription brackets or a group treated with conventional MBT twin brackets. Lower anterior irregularity was measured at the start of treatment, 10 weeks later at the first archwire change and 20 weeks after the start of treatment at the second archwire change.


RESULTS
There was no difference in irregularity at the start of treatment. At 10 weeks subjects treated with conventional brackets had a lower irregularity index than subjects treated with SmartClip brackets (Mean difference: 0.7 mm; p = 0.005). After 20 weeks there were no statistically significant differences in irregularity between the two groups (Mean difference: 0 mm; p = 0.82).


CONCLUSIONS
The SmartClip bracket was no more effective at reducing irregularity during the initial stage of treatment than a conventional twin bracket ligated with elastomeric modules or stainless steel ligatures.
Miles
Peter G
PG
pmiles@beautifulsmiles.com.au pmiles@beautifulsmiles.com.au
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D002648:Child; D020724:Elastomers / Q000737:chemistry; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007180:Incisor / Q000473:pathology; D008297:Male; D008310:Malocclusion / Q000473:pathology / Q000628:therapy; D008875:Middle Aged; D016382:Orthodontic Appliance Design; D016910:Orthodontic Brackets; D009969:Orthodontic Wires; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013193:Stainless Steel / Q000737:chemistry; D014087:Tooth Movement Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
D020724:Elastomers; D013193:Stainless Steel