Two practitioners discuss how indirect bonding with Dibs AI has made practice more predictable and profitable
Dr. Laura Bonner
Dr. David Caggiano
From the beginning, traditional indirect bonding (IDB) as a
replacement for direct bonding faced challenges. Early attempts to
digitize were difficult, including ineffective or complicated software
and inaccurate bracket placement. Yet, recent digital advancements,
including artificial intelligence, improved 3D printing and even
better print resins have radically changed IDB. Digital IDB today
appears to have finally matured into a simpler, more practical and
powerful tool for saving time and improving overall case outcomes.
OrthoSelect, which has spent eight years perfecting digital IDB
software and 3D-printed transfer trays, recently launched Dibs AI,
an integrated software platform that brings IDB to a new level of
ease and accuracy. To gain a better perspective on how digital
IDB can change the way orthodontists practice, we spoke with two
doctors who use Dibs AI: Dr. Laura Bonner (Bonner Orthodontics,
Rogers, Arkansas) and Dr. David Caggiano (Caggiano Orthodontics,
Parsippany, New Jersey).
Tell us a little bit about
you and your practice.
Bonner: I was born and raised in Colorado and attended dental
school at the University of Colorado, with my orthodontic residency
at the University of Iowa. After that, I opened my practice in 2015.
Caggiano: I’ve been practicing orthodontics since 2008. In
college, I received a master’s in biomedical engineering, so I have
a good background to assimilate technology into my practice.
How long have you been doing
indirect bonding (IDB)?
Bonner: I was introduced to IDB as a technique in residency
and have indirectly bonded ever since.
Caggiano: I’ve been doing IDB since 2009.
What other IDB systems have you
used other than OrthoSelect’s
Dibs AI? How does your current
experience differ?
Bonner: I’ve used traditional IDB [with plaster models] in the
past. Once I incorporated intraoral scanning into my practice, I
immediately started researching for digital versions of indirect
bonding. Dibs AI kept coming up as an outstanding system,
and OrthoSelect as an outstanding company, and the reviews
I read online have matched my experience.
Caggiano: I’ve tried almost every IDB system. The great part
about the Dibs AI platform is its in-house option—case setups
and printing are all done by my staff. Sliding brackets under the
gingiva is a great unique feature, too.
What has been your general
experience using IDB?
Bonner: Like many doctors, I found traditional IDB somewhat
laborious. After I learned the ropes, though, Dibs AI software
became intuitive, with individual display settings for moving
brackets and customizable to how I like “seeing” bracket
placement. The simulated outcome is a powerful diagnostic
tool and is accurate to what I achieve clinically. Trays are very
consistently excellent quality. They hold our brackets in place
perfectly—not too tight, not too loose! It’s easy to determine
that the tray is seated properly on the teeth during bonding.
Caggiano: There is a difference between Dibs AI and traditional
IDB. Most doctors think of IDB with transfer trays, braces and
custom pads. The disadvantage is you’re adhering multiple layers
of glue, which is not as strong and lends to error and debonds.
With Dibs AI, there is no glue on the pad of the brace—it’s
similar to direct bonding, but using the transfer tray to place
the brackets. There is no adjusting the brace; they just go on,
are light-cured and lead to a strong bond.
How much of a learning curve
was there when implementing
IDB in your practice?
Bonner: My team was instrumental in shortening the learning
curve. They are disciplined in the prep of teeth and trays. That’s
imperative for success with any IDB system.
Caggiano: Virtually zero learning curve—placing the braces on
with IDB is much easier clinically than direct bonding. There is
a small curve when looking at the position of the braces on a
computer, as opposed to in the mouth, but you learn quickly.
What benefits have you seen using IDB versus direct bonding?
Bonner: More accurate bracket placement, which translates to
better root parallelism, reduced marginal ridge discrepancies
and reduced wire bending and/or repos. For multidisciplinary
patients, Dibs AI software is a very powerful communication
tool with referring doctors. For example, I will send a
screenshot of the simulated final tooth position to a patient’s
dentist when planning postorthodontic restorative treatment.
Getting feedback on final tooth position before bonding is
certainly valuable. This type of communication has not only
strengthened my referral relationship with some excellent
doctors but also streamlined care when collaboration between
doctors is required.
Caggiano: I am at the chair for three minutes so, obviously,
less doctor time. The braces are placed far more accurately
than I can do directly—I don’t care how good you are at
direct, indirect is more accurate. Additionally, there are fewer
bond failures because the trays are precise and light-cured
immediately. Also, there is less excess cement. When there
is excess, it’s occlusal, not gingival, which obviously is easier
to clean and better for the gingiva.
Has IDB saved you time?
Bonner: Chairside time on bonding day is certainly shorter,
compared with direct bonding.
Caggiano: Doctor time for an IDB is almost one-third of that for
a direct bond. But there is also less mental energy required.
Doing seven IDBs in a morning is easy. Seven direct bonds … it
gets a little draining. Another advantage is the turnaround time
is extremely fast. We do same-day cases with in-house printing,
or OrthoSelect can print and ship for late next-day bonds. This
system in particular has decreased the number of appointments
for overall treatment. We are finishing the majority of cases in
minimal visits, thus increasing profitability.
How long do you typically spend
in the software on case setups?
Bonner: OrthoSelect does the initial setup for me; I then adjust
and approve. About five minutes total for me.
Caggiano: My lab technician spends about seven minutes in
the software for preliminary bracket placement. It takes me
just a few minutes for final setup, then two minutes to have the
computer generate the trays.
Do you delegate any IDB work—
case setups, bonding appointments—
to your assistants, or do you do all
the work yourself?
Bonner: As mentioned, we use OrthoSelect for the initial
setup. It also prints and ships the trays. Then my staff places
the brackets in the trays. On bonding day, my staff prepares the
teeth and I place the trays and bond. They remove the trays
and tie in archwires.
Caggiano: The entire process can be delegated. My lab
technician and some assistants are trained to do the initial setup
in the software, I like to do the final adjustments, and then my
team 3D-prints the IDB trays. As far as the clinical procedure,
my assistants prepare the patient, but in New Jersey the doctor
has to place the braces, so I come to the chair, slide on the four
quadrants separately and tack-cure the braces in place. My
assistants finish curing.
Has there been a financial benefit
from implementing IDB? If so, how
do you measure it?
Bonner: I’m not sure of exact figures—I think anytime you strive for
excellence, the money will work itself out in immeasurable ways:
more referrals, better patient experience, better collaboration
with dentists. Compared with other digital IDB systems, I think
OrthoSelect’s costs are reasonable.
Caggiano: We measure production per doctor hour, production
per team member per hour, and dollars per visit for each patient.
I’m in a couple of study clubs, and our numbers are at the high
end for all those metrics.
What has been your experience
printing in-house?
Bonner: We may consider in-house printing in the future, but
we’re happy with OrthoSelect doing the printing—less mess
and hassle for us. Its turnaround time is excellent.
Caggiano: We are proficient with 3D printing in house. I have a
lab coordinator who is very good with following each step exactly
during production. With 200 cases and counting, we’ve never
had a 3D-printed IDB tray that didn’t fit—it’s very predictable.
What has been your patients’
experience with IDB?
Bonner: At initial consultation and bonding day, I often get
comments of how great it is that technology has improved the
process of putting braces on.
Caggiano: Patients are more comfortable with Dibs AI trays,
compared with other systems we’ve used. We utilize Nola
retractors. Most doctors are aware that suction tubes sometimes
get in the way with some IDB systems. We worked closely with
OrthoSelect and helped design transfer trays with minimal
occlusal and no lingual coverage on the 6s and 7s, so the IDB
trays slide on easily.
What advice would you give to your
colleagues considering implementing
IDB in their practices?
Bonner: I know IDB often gets a bad rap for “extra lab work
time” and increased bond failures. However, these two factors
can be overcome quickly with a good system in place in your
office. IDB has become accurate, quick and predictable for me.
Training staff is going to be the most important part of successful
IDB integration.
Caggiano: Research shows that IDB is more accurate than direct
bonding. It also requires less doctor time and leads to fewer
visits and fewer broken braces. I honestly can’t understand why
all orthodontists don’t do IDB. If the cost per case is an issue,
then a mindset change is needed. Better bracket placement,
less doctor time, fewer broken braces equals greater profitability.
I challenge everyone to just give it a try—you have nothing to
lose and so much to gain!
DISCOVER MORE ABOUT DIBS AI
AND INDIRECT BONDING ADVANCES
To learn more about how Dibs AI can transform
your practice, visit dibsai.com.