Cargando…

Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the frictional resistance generated by conventional stainless steel, radiance ceramic bracket, self-ligating and composite brackets using a 0.019 × 0.025 stainless steel straight length wires in a 022 slot and to select brackets bas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pillai, Ajith R., Gangadharan, Anil, Kumar, Satheesh, Shah, Anwar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4157255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25210359
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0975-7406.137429
_version_ 1782333843602145280
author Pillai, Ajith R.
Gangadharan, Anil
Kumar, Satheesh
Shah, Anwar
author_facet Pillai, Ajith R.
Gangadharan, Anil
Kumar, Satheesh
Shah, Anwar
author_sort Pillai, Ajith R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the frictional resistance generated by conventional stainless steel, radiance ceramic bracket, self-ligating and composite brackets using a 0.019 × 0.025 stainless steel straight length wires in a 022 slot and to select brackets based on their frictional characteristic. METHODOLOGY: In order to conduct this study, four different types of bracket system were selected of the mclaughlin-bennet-trevesi (MBT) discipline. They are Group 1 - stainless steel, Group 2 - composite bracket Group 3 - (American Orthodontics) radiance ceramic bracket Group 4 - self-ligating bracket (SLB) (Empower). In this study, five maxillary brackets of an arch of each type were used. All brackets are 0.022 × 0.028 in preadjusted edgewise appliance which simulates the dental arch. Five brackets were bonded to a stainless steel bar of dimension 150 mm × 25 mm × 3 mm. The bracket-arch wire units were submitted to mechanical test with an Instron universal testing machine 3365. A testing apparatus or holding jig was designed to hold the bracket during the mechanical test. Each sample was pulled at a speed of 6 mm for 1 min. Descriptive statistical information including mean and standard deviation of maximum friction force was calculated for each bracket wire combination. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: The SLB has the least friction among the four groups. The ceramic bracket showed the highest friction followed by stainless steel bracket, composite bracket, and SLB.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4157255
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41572552014-09-10 Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study Pillai, Ajith R. Gangadharan, Anil Kumar, Satheesh Shah, Anwar J Pharm Bioallied Sci Dental Science - Original Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the frictional resistance generated by conventional stainless steel, radiance ceramic bracket, self-ligating and composite brackets using a 0.019 × 0.025 stainless steel straight length wires in a 022 slot and to select brackets based on their frictional characteristic. METHODOLOGY: In order to conduct this study, four different types of bracket system were selected of the mclaughlin-bennet-trevesi (MBT) discipline. They are Group 1 - stainless steel, Group 2 - composite bracket Group 3 - (American Orthodontics) radiance ceramic bracket Group 4 - self-ligating bracket (SLB) (Empower). In this study, five maxillary brackets of an arch of each type were used. All brackets are 0.022 × 0.028 in preadjusted edgewise appliance which simulates the dental arch. Five brackets were bonded to a stainless steel bar of dimension 150 mm × 25 mm × 3 mm. The bracket-arch wire units were submitted to mechanical test with an Instron universal testing machine 3365. A testing apparatus or holding jig was designed to hold the bracket during the mechanical test. Each sample was pulled at a speed of 6 mm for 1 min. Descriptive statistical information including mean and standard deviation of maximum friction force was calculated for each bracket wire combination. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSION: The SLB has the least friction among the four groups. The ceramic bracket showed the highest friction followed by stainless steel bracket, composite bracket, and SLB. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2014-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4157255/ /pubmed/25210359 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0975-7406.137429 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Pharmacy and Bioallied Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Dental Science - Original Article
Pillai, Ajith R.
Gangadharan, Anil
Kumar, Satheesh
Shah, Anwar
Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title_full Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title_fullStr Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title_short Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: An in vitro study
title_sort comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: an in vitro study
topic Dental Science - Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4157255/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25210359
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0975-7406.137429
work_keys_str_mv AT pillaiajithr comparisonofthefrictionalresistancebetweenarchwireanddifferentbracketsystemaninvitrostudy
AT gangadharananil comparisonofthefrictionalresistancebetweenarchwireanddifferentbracketsystemaninvitrostudy
AT kumarsatheesh comparisonofthefrictionalresistancebetweenarchwireanddifferentbracketsystemaninvitrostudy
AT shahanwar comparisonofthefrictionalresistancebetweenarchwireanddifferentbracketsystemaninvitrostudy