A Alper Oz1, Nursel Arici, Selim Arici. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey. alperoz@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the extent of canine movement with sliding mechanics between a self-ligating (SC) bracket and a modified twin design (MT) bracket. To test the in vitro coefficient of friction (COFs) of these two metal brackets on 0.019- × 0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wires. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For the clinical portion of this study, a split-mouth design was used to bond the brackets of 19 patients. Canine distalization was achieved on a 0.019- × 0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wire with a nickel-titanium, closed-coil spring strained between a mini-screw and a canine bracket. The linear and angular measurements were performed using lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before and after canine distalization. A tribometer was also used to measure the COFs of the bracket types in vitro. For comparisons, Student's t-tests for paired and unpaired samples were used at the 95% confidence level. RESULTS: The extent of canine movement and the changes in the canine and molar teeth angles were not significantly different between the SC and MT brackets. After 8 weeks, the mean canine movements were 1.83 and 1.89 mm in the maxilla and 1.79 mm and 1.70 mm in the mandible with the SC and MT brackets, respectively. The mean COF of the MT brackets (0.21) was significantly lower than that of the SC brackets (0.37) during in vitro testing. CONCLUSION: It is suggested that the rate of canine distalization was not different between the two groups, although in vitro COFs of the SC bracket was higher.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the extent of canine movement with sliding mechanics between a self-ligating (SC) bracket and a modified twin design (MT) bracket. To test the in vitro coefficient of friction (COFs) of these two metal brackets on 0.019- × 0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wires. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For the clinical portion of this study, a split-mouth design was used to bond the brackets of 19 patients. Canine distalization was achieved on a 0.019- × 0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wire with a nickel-titanium, closed-coil spring strained between a mini-screw and a canine bracket. The linear and angular measurements were performed using lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before and after canine distalization. A tribometer was also used to measure the COFs of the bracket types in vitro. For comparisons, Student's t-tests for paired and unpaired samples were used at the 95% confidence level. RESULTS: The extent of canine movement and the changes in the canine and molar teeth angles were not significantly different between the SC and MT brackets. After 8 weeks, the mean canine movements were 1.83 and 1.89 mm in the maxilla and 1.79 mm and 1.70 mm in the mandible with the SC and MT brackets, respectively. The mean COF of the MT brackets (0.21) was significantly lower than that of the SC brackets (0.37) during in vitro testing. CONCLUSION: It is suggested that the rate of canine distalization was not different between the two groups, although in vitro COFs of the SC bracket was higher.
Authors: G Willems; K Clocheret; J P Celis; G Verbeke; E Chatzicharalampous; C Carels Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Andre da C Monini; Luiz G Gandini; Alexandre P Vianna; Renato P Martins; Helder B Jacob Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2019-02-11 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: Qiaozhen Zhou; Abdul Azeem Amin Ul Haq; Liu Tian; Xiaofeng Chen; Kui Huang; Yu Zhou Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2015-11-04 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Fabio Savoldi; Aggeliki Papoutsi; Simona Dianiskova; Domenico Dalessandri; Stefano Bonetti; James K H Tsoi; Jukka P Matinlinna; Corrado Paganelli Journal: Korean J Orthod Date: 2018-07-06 Impact factor: 1.372