Literature DB >> 12045765

Comparison of resistance to sliding between different self-ligating brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and saliva states.

Glenys A Thorstenson1, Robert P Kusy.   

Abstract

Resistance to sliding was investigated for 3 self-ligating brackets having passive slides and 3 self-ligating brackets having active clips. Four of these products are currently marketed, and 2 are of historic interest. For all cases, an 0.018 x 0.025-in stainless steel archwire was drawn through each bracket at a rate of 10 mm/min over a distance of 2.5 mm. For each bracket, the resistances to sliding were measured at 14 second-order angulations, which ranged from -9 degrees to +9 degrees. Both the dry and the wet (human saliva) states were evaluated at 34 degrees C. From dimensional measurements, the critical contact angles for binding were determined for all products and ranged from 3 degrees to 5 degrees. Below each characteristic critical angle, brackets with passive slides exhibited negligible friction; brackets with active clips exhibited frictional forces as great as 50 cN (50 g). Above each critical angle, all brackets had elastic binding forces that increased at similar rates as angulation increased and were independent of bracket design. Generally speaking, at second-order angulations that exceeded the critical angle, brackets with active clips that had a low critical angle had more resistance to sliding than did brackets with active clips that had a higher critical angle. Brackets with passive slides that had a high critical angle exhibited the lowest resistance to sliding, but could do so at a cost of some loss of control. Nonetheless, self-ligating brackets represent a compromise between friction and control; ie, self-ligating brackets produce frictional forces that are more reproducible than do conventionally ligated stainless steel brackets but without the potential control problems associated with Begg-style brackets.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12045765     DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.121562

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  27 in total

1.  Comparative evaluation of anchorage loss between self-ligating appliance and Conventional pre-adjusted edgewise appliance using sliding mechanics - A retrospective study.

Authors:  Pankaj Juneja; G Shivaprakash; S S Chopra; P B Kambalyal
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2014-04-03

2.  A comparative study of frictional force in self-ligating brackets according to the bracket-archwire angulation, bracket material, and wire type.

Authors:  Souk Min Lee; Chung-Ju Hwang
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2015-01-26       Impact factor: 1.372

3.  The dynforce archwire.

Authors:  Daniele Cantarella; Luca Lombardo; Giuseppe Siciliani
Journal:  Ann Stomatol (Roma)       Date:  2013-06-25

Review 4.  Differences between active and passive self-ligating brackets for orthodontic treatment : Systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Xianrui Yang; Yiruo He; Tian Chen; Mengyuan Zhao; Yinqiu Yan; Hongzhe Wang; Ding Bai
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 1.938

5.  Effect of archwire qualities and bracket designs on the force systems during leveling of malaligned teeth.

Authors:  W Perrey; A Konermann; L Keilig; S Reimann; A Jäger; C Bourauel
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 1.938

Review 6.  Systematic review on self-ligating vs. conventional brackets: initial pain, number of visits, treatment time.

Authors:  Ales Čelar; Magdalena Schedlberger; Petra Dörfler; Michael Bertl
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 1.938

7.  Friction properties according to vertical and horizontal tooth displacement and bracket type during initial leveling and alignment.

Authors:  Wook Heo; Seung-Hak Baek
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 2.079

8.  Relationship between friction force and orthodontic force at the leveling stage using a coated wire.

Authors:  Masaki Murayama; Yasuhiro Namura; Takahiko Tamura; Hiroaki Iwai; Noriyoshi Shimizu
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.698

9.  Debris, roughness and friction of stainless steel archwires following clinical use.

Authors:  Isabella Silva Vieira Marques; Adriana M Araújo; Júlio A Gurgel; David Normando
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets.

Authors:  S Jack Burrow
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.