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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |