No significant differences in the various parameters were found between both the techniques of canine retraction by distraction osteogenesis, while reducing orthodontic treatment duration by 6-9 months without any unfavorable short-term effects on the periodontium.

Introduction: Debonding of ceramic brackets requires a technique that will restore the enamel surface possibly to its pretreatment condition.Objective: To evaluate a comparative degree of enamel loss with various debonding techniques.

Introduction:Patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances have a challenging oral hygiene situation because brackets tenaciously trap food and other oral debris.Good plaque control is an important factor in the maintenance of dental health during fixed appliance therapy. Many different types of specially designed toothbrushes have been developed in recent years in order to improve the plaque removal. One of these new developments is a manual triple headed brush which is called 'superbrush' which is intended to clean the oral, buccal and occlusal surfaces of the teeth at one time. A clinical study was planned to evaluate the effectiveness of plaque removal by using the new triple headed toothbrush compared to the conventional manual toothbrush and an orthodontic toothbrush. Methods: A total of 75 patients, aged between 18 and 28 years, were equally divided into three groups: Group I (triple headed toothbrush), group II (orthodontic toothbrush) and group III (conventional toothbrush). The gingival index (Loe and Silness, 1963) and plaque index (Turesky Gilmore and Glickman, 1962) were recorded at baseline, month 1, month 2, month 3 and month 4, and results were subjected to statistical analysis utilizing ANOVA one way and multiple comparison Tukey's HSD test. Results: Comparison of the mean gingival and plaque index scores and difference in mean plaque scores between the groups was done and found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). Conclusion:The study indicated that the triple headed toothbrush was more efficient in reduction of plaque scores and improvement in gingival index scores overall, and more effective in removal of plaque from tooth surfaces compared to the other two toothbrushes.

Ceramic brackets were introduced in 1987 as a more esthetically pleasing alternative to stainless steel brackets. 1 Two types of ceramic brackets are available according to their distinct differences during fabrication, they are: polycrystalline and monocrystalline (single-crystal) aluminas. 2,3 Both polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets possess various base designs such as grooves, beads, or round pits for the purpose of mechanical interlocking between the brackets and the teeth. 4 As bracket bases do not chemically bond to enamel or resin, efforts are made to improve mechanical retention using various designs. ABSTRACTObjective: To evaluate the influence of bracket base designs on shear bond strength of ceramic brackets bonded to natural teeth and to determine the common site of bond failure. Materials & Method:120 therapeutically extracted maxillary first premolars were divided into six groups of 20 samples each and were mounted in resin blocks. Each sample was bonded with bracket of that particular group and subjected to thermocycling. The shear bond strength was measured using Universal Testing Machine. After debonding, the teeth and brackets were examined under stereo-microscope for adhesive remnant index. Result: Ceramic brackets with ball base design (Group MATERIALS AND METHODThe study was conducted in the Department of Orthodontics, ITS-CDSR, Muradnagar, Ghaziabad and ITS EngineeringCollege, Noida. The study was conducted on 120 extracted human maxillary first premolars. All teeth used in the study were extracted therapeutically for orthodontic treatment and were stored in 0.1% thymol solution. The teeth were washed, debrided and then stored in distilled water to prevent dehydration and bacterial growth. The teeth were cleansed and then polished with non-flouridated pumice and rubber prophylactic cup for 10 seconds.

In providing orthodontic care for paediatric patients, clinicians often questions whether to begin treatment early-during the primary or early-transitional dentition-or wait until all or most of the permanent teeth are present. A comprehensive knowledge is necessary for planning the implementation of preventive therapy or the choice for interception is left. Early orthodontic treatment is effective and desirable in specific situations. The early treatment eliminates noxious habits, re-orientates dental-maxillary development and compensates for the structural discrepancy between teeth and bone. This leads to a timely correction of defects, which could have a negative aesthetic impact, therefore, contributing effectively to a better harmonization of the child with the human environment where he lives, and improving his feelings of acceptance within it. However, the evidence is equally compelling that such an approach is not indicated in many cases for which later, single-phase treatment is more effective. Therefore, clinicians must decide, on a case-by-case basis, when to provide orthodontic treatment.