Question · asked by 0 reviews
Self etching primer (one-step etchant-and-primer technique) vs Conventional etchants (conventional multiprocedural etch-and-prime technique): Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field
- Population
- Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars
- Intervention
- Self etching primer (one-step etchant-and-primer technique)
- Comparison
- Conventional etchants (conventional multiprocedural etch-and-prime technique)
- Outcome
- Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Self etching primer (one-step etchant-and-primer technique) vs Conventional etchants (conventional multiprocedural etch-and-prime technique) Decay (decalcification) associated with or around the etching field · Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and premolars · At least 1 year The review found no eligible studies for this question. Enamel etching for bonding fixed orthodontic braces (2005) · Cochrane All outcomesearlier version CD005516, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enamel etching for bonding fixed orthodontic braces 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2013-03 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Self etching primer (one-step etchant-and-primer technique) vs Conventional etchants (two-step etch and prime method using 37% phosphoric acid) · Children and adults with fixed orthodontic brackets bonded to incisors, canines and… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.