INTRODUCTION: Coated archwires have been introduced to improve esthetics during orthodontic treatment. Our aim was to investigate the mechanical properties of coated superelastic archwires compared with conventional superelastic archwires with conventional and self-ligating brackets. METHODS: Four types of orthodontic archwires were investigated, 2 superelastic nickel-titanium and 2 coated Ultraesthetic archwires in 0.016-in and 0.018 x 0.025-in dimensions (all from G&H Wire, Greenwood, Ind). To achieve the same nominal size, the coated archwire is constructed from a smaller archwire that, when coated, reaches the nominal dimensions stated for the archwire. Conventional edgewise Orthos and Damon 2 self-ligating brackets (both from Ormco, Orange, Calif) were used with each wire. All specimens were tested in a universal testing machine in a 3-point bending test at a speed of 1 mm per minute and deflected for 2 mm. Loading and unloading forces were recorded and load-deflection curves plotted. RESULTS: Coated superelastic wires produced statistically significantly lower forces in loading and unloading when compared with the superelastic nickel-titanium wires at most archwire deflections (P <0.01). For nickel-titanium wires, loading values ranged from 189 to 1202 g, whereas the respective values for coated wires were 124 to 772 g. For all wires, an increase in size resulted in an increase in force. Interactions between wire type (coated or uncoated) and bracket type were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Ultraesthetic coated archwires produced lower force values in loading and unloading compared with uncoated wires of same nominal size. The Damon 2 self-ligating bracket system produced lower force values in loading and unloading. The lowest forces were generated by the combination of Ultraesthetic coated archwires and Damon 2 self-ligating brackets.
INTRODUCTION: Coated archwires have been introduced to improve esthetics during orthodontic treatment. Our aim was to investigate the mechanical properties of coated superelastic archwires compared with conventional superelastic archwires with conventional and self-ligating brackets. METHODS: Four types of orthodontic archwires were investigated, 2 superelastic nickel-titanium and 2 coated Ultraesthetic archwires in 0.016-in and 0.018 x 0.025-in dimensions (all from G&H Wire, Greenwood, Ind). To achieve the same nominal size, the coated archwire is constructed from a smaller archwire that, when coated, reaches the nominal dimensions stated for the archwire. Conventional edgewise Orthos and Damon 2 self-ligating brackets (both from Ormco, Orange, Calif) were used with each wire. All specimens were tested in a universal testing machine in a 3-point bending test at a speed of 1 mm per minute and deflected for 2 mm. Loading and unloading forces were recorded and load-deflection curves plotted. RESULTS: Coated superelastic wires produced statistically significantly lower forces in loading and unloading when compared with the superelastic nickel-titanium wires at most archwire deflections (P <0.01). For nickel-titanium wires, loading values ranged from 189 to 1202 g, whereas the respective values for coated wires were 124 to 772 g. For all wires, an increase in size resulted in an increase in force. Interactions between wire type (coated or uncoated) and bracket type were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Ultraesthetic coated archwires produced lower force values in loading and unloading compared with uncoated wires of same nominal size. The Damon 2 self-ligating bracket system produced lower force values in loading and unloading. The lowest forces were generated by the combination of Ultraesthetic coated archwires and Damon 2 self-ligating brackets.