| 000 | 03452cam a2200349 a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 003 | EG-GiCUC | ||
| 005 | 20250223032506.0 | ||
| 008 | 191226s2019 ua dho f m 000 0 eng d | ||
| 040 |
_aEG-GiCUC _beng _cEG-GiCUC |
||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 049 | _aDeposite | ||
| 097 | _aM.Sc | ||
| 099 | _aCai01.09.06.M.Sc.2019.Mo.C | ||
| 100 | 0 | _aMohamed Essam Mohamed Abdulfatah | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 |
_aChairside time and accuracy of indirect bonding of orthodontic attachments using double versus single transfer tray (split mouth design) : _bA randomized controlled trial / _cMohamed Essam Mohamed Abdulfatah ; Supervised Fatma Abdou Abdelsayed , Hoda Mohamed Abdulaziz , Mai Hamdy Aboul Fotouh |
| 246 | 1 | 5 |
_aدراسة الفرق فى مدة المعالجة ودقة نقل الحاصرات التقويمية فى تقنية اللصق الغير مباشر عند استخدام حامل بطبقة واحدة او بطبقتين - تصميم تقسيم الفم : _bدراسة سريرية عشوائية |
| 260 |
_aCairo : _bMohamed Essam Mohamed Abdulfatah , _c2019 |
||
| 300 |
_a69 P. : _bcharts , facsimiles , photographs ; _c25cm |
||
| 502 | _aThesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Oral and Dental Medicine - Department of Orthodontics | ||
| 520 | _aObjective: This study is a split mouth design aimed to compare the difference between two types of indirect bonding trays (single sheet versus double sheets) regarding Chairside time, accuracy of transferring orthodontic attachments in all 3 planes of space using 3D scanning and superimposition and bond failure rate of orthodontic attachments immediately after detachment of the transfer trays and patients` satisfaction during the bonding procedure. Materials and methods: A randomized controlled trial (split mouth design) compared between the single versus double transfer trays techniques was performed. 84 attachments were bonded to the maxillary teeth from central to second molar for both groups. After placement of the attachments on the working model using water soluble glue regarding the vertical and horizontal reference lines, the model was sprayed with titanium dioxide powder then scanned with intraoral scanner and preoperative STL file was saved. The single and double transfer trays were fabricated. The attachment were transferred to the patient`s dentition using the two techniques, then the patient`s dentition with attachments were scanned with the same intraoral scanner and post-transfer STL file was saved. The chairside time for each group was measured using stopwatch. By using the Geomagic qualify version 12, the two STL files were superimposed and the deviations were detected for 7 values, 4 linear measurements (total linear, mesio-distal, occluso-gingival and bucco-lingual) and 3 angular measurements (tip, torque and rotation). The attachments failure rates were recorded immediately. A visual analog scale was given to each subject to measure their satisfaction towards the both used indirect bonding techniques | ||
| 530 | _aIssued also as CD | ||
| 653 | 4 | _aChairside time and accuracy | |
| 653 | 4 | _aIndirect bonding | |
| 653 | 4 | _aOrthodontic attachments | |
| 700 | 0 |
_aFatma Abdou Abdelsayed , _eSupervisor |
|
| 700 | 0 |
_aHoda Mohamed Abdulaziz , _eSupervisor |
|
| 700 | 0 |
_aMai Hamdy Aboul Fotouh , _eSupervisor |
|
| 856 | _uhttp://172.23.153.220/th.pdf | ||
| 905 |
_aAsmaa _eCataloger |
||
| 905 |
_aNazla _eRevisor |
||
| 942 |
_2ddc _cTH |
||
| 999 |
_c76094 _d76094 |
||