Journal of Pharmaceutical Research International

Background: Accurate bracket placement is essential for achieving optimal orthodontic treatment outcomes. Errors in vertical or axial positioning can alter torque expression, tip, and in–out relationships, thereby affecting the final occlusal result. Although several gauges assist in vertical positioning, their ability to ensure accuracy in both vertical and horizontal planes remains limited. Therefore, the present study aimed to compare the accuracy of bracket positioning between the MBT gauge and the self-designed Mirror-Guided Bracket Positioner (MGBP) in maxillary anterior teeth.

Materials and Methods: This prospective split-mouth in vivo clinical study was conducted on 25 orthodontic patients. The maxillary arch was divided into right and left segments (central incisor to canine), with each patient serving as their own control. A balanced randomization protocol was followed, wherein in 12 patients the right side was bonded using the MBT gauge and the left side using the MGBP positioner, while in the remaining 13 patients the allocation was reversed to minimize site bias. Bracket positioning was performed by a single operator using composite resin and LED curing. The accuracy of bracket positioning between the two devices was assessed using a digital Vernier caliper, by measuring distances from the bracket scribe line to mesial, distal, incisal, and gingival reference points. Data were analyzed using appropriate paired statistical tests, with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results: The MGBP group demonstrated higher mean surface scores across all tooth surfaces compared to the MBT group. Statistically significant differences were observed in the mesial and occlusal surfaces of central incisors, the gingival surface of lateral incisors, and the mesial, distal, and occlusal surfaces of canines, indicating superior bracket positioning accuracy with the MGBP technique.

Conclusion: The MGBP technique demonstrated enhanced accuracy and more favorable surface outcomes compared to the conventional MBT gauge. Its dual-arm design improves visualization, reduces parallax error, and facilitates precise bracket placement, making it an efficient and reliable alternative for clinical use.