In orthodontics it seems to be a fashion that some manufacturers of brackets give unrealistic promises in sales promotion. It’s particular popular to claim that in comparison to other brackets bracket X called for a shorter treatment duration, less appointments, more comfort, minor root resorption and less wires.
Fastbraces was developed around 1995 by Anthony Viazis, an American orthodontist. This bracket is supposed to have those wonderous characteristics. They are described in detail on the website https://fastbraces.com/. The following statements are mentioned: Whereas orthodontic treatment with “normal” brackets was supposed to take several years the treatment duration with Fastbraces was just six months. While using common brackets, wires had to be changed regularly. Fastbraces worked with only a single wire. Naturally, patients had less pain, discomfort and root resorption than with “normal” brackets. It’s really funny that Mr. Viazis claims, Fastbraces provoked root movement right from the start whereas the commonly used brackets only moved the tooth crown. There’s another wonderous characteristic which must not be missing: If Fastbraces was used, patients would virtually never have tooth extractions.
It doesn’t have to be mentioned that these advantages of Fastbraces aren’t proven by scientific studies but are based on casual statements. If you are an orthodontist with years of experience who has worked with different bracket types you’ll come to the conclusion that differences between bracket types are minor and are mainly focused on a better manageability. Even Fastbraces’ original triangular bracket shape wouldn’t be a sufficient reason why this product should have a superior effectiveness. Against the background, orthodontists who are engaged in scientific research wouldn’t be persuaded to start a comparative study between Fastbraces and “normal” ones. There have been a lot of studies with numerous bracket types without finding any significant clinical differences between them. During the past 20 years while Fastbraces has been available on the market, the inventor Viazis didn’t take the trouble to prove his claims conducting a high-quality study. So we can draw the conclusion that Fastbraces doesn’t differ a lot from “normal” ones and is marketed in a dishonest and quite unfair way.
This even provoked criticism from the British regulatory organization Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). On 23 April 2016 they stopped a British orthodontic practice giving advertising statements about Fastbraces. ASA criticized numerous rule violations within the Fastbrace advertising: e.g. misleading, exaggeration and incorrect comparison to competing products. The owners of the practice were told to stop claiming that treatment duration with Fastbraces was shorter, patients suffered less pain and there was less root resorption than with “normal” brackets as long as they couldn’t prove it. You can learn more about the decision of the ASA under https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/igdp-ltd-a16-348854.html.