Cargando…

Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating

Friction is an intensely studied feature in orthodontics, as the sliding mechanics approach remains one of the most utilized techniques in current practice, and the question of whether self-ligating brackets produce less friction than conventional brackets still stands. The objective of this study w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu, Serbanoiu, Dan-Cosmin, Ghiga, Dana-Valentina, Moldovan, Marioara, Cuc, Stanca, Pollmann, Maria Cristina Figueiredo, Pacurar, Mariana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9229450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35744359
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15124304
_version_ 1784734750378819584
author Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu
Serbanoiu, Dan-Cosmin
Ghiga, Dana-Valentina
Moldovan, Marioara
Cuc, Stanca
Pollmann, Maria Cristina Figueiredo
Pacurar, Mariana
author_facet Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu
Serbanoiu, Dan-Cosmin
Ghiga, Dana-Valentina
Moldovan, Marioara
Cuc, Stanca
Pollmann, Maria Cristina Figueiredo
Pacurar, Mariana
author_sort Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu
collection PubMed
description Friction is an intensely studied feature in orthodontics, as the sliding mechanics approach remains one of the most utilized techniques in current practice, and the question of whether self-ligating brackets produce less friction than conventional brackets still stands. The objective of this study was to compare a self-ligating system with different closing mechanisms and a conventional system with different ligating mechanisms regarding their frictional properties. Laboratory measurements were performed using an advanced materials testing machine generating tensile strength and load at maximum Load values, which were statistically analyzed and compared. These two parameters have been associated with the frictional resistance generated at the archwire–bracket slot interface. Statistically significant results were obtained when comparing the active self-ligating brackets with the passive self-ligating (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum moad mean 6.000, SD 1.3000) and conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum load mean 6.000, SD 1.3000), as well as when comparing the passive self-ligating brackets with the conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.708, SD 0.8628; load at maximum load mean 5.254, SD 2.645). The active self-ligating brackets tended to produce more friction when compared to the passive self-ligating brackets but were similar to conventional brackets with stainless steel ligatures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9229450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92294502022-06-25 Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu Serbanoiu, Dan-Cosmin Ghiga, Dana-Valentina Moldovan, Marioara Cuc, Stanca Pollmann, Maria Cristina Figueiredo Pacurar, Mariana Materials (Basel) Article Friction is an intensely studied feature in orthodontics, as the sliding mechanics approach remains one of the most utilized techniques in current practice, and the question of whether self-ligating brackets produce less friction than conventional brackets still stands. The objective of this study was to compare a self-ligating system with different closing mechanisms and a conventional system with different ligating mechanisms regarding their frictional properties. Laboratory measurements were performed using an advanced materials testing machine generating tensile strength and load at maximum Load values, which were statistically analyzed and compared. These two parameters have been associated with the frictional resistance generated at the archwire–bracket slot interface. Statistically significant results were obtained when comparing the active self-ligating brackets with the passive self-ligating (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum moad mean 6.000, SD 1.3000) and conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.953, SD 0.4231; load at maximum load mean 6.000, SD 1.3000), as well as when comparing the passive self-ligating brackets with the conventional brackets (tensile strength mean 1.708, SD 0.8628; load at maximum load mean 5.254, SD 2.645). The active self-ligating brackets tended to produce more friction when compared to the passive self-ligating brackets but were similar to conventional brackets with stainless steel ligatures. MDPI 2022-06-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9229450/ /pubmed/35744359 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15124304 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Vartolomei, Aurel-Claudiu
Serbanoiu, Dan-Cosmin
Ghiga, Dana-Valentina
Moldovan, Marioara
Cuc, Stanca
Pollmann, Maria Cristina Figueiredo
Pacurar, Mariana
Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title_full Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title_fullStr Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title_full_unstemmed Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title_short Comparative Evaluation of Two Bracket Systems’ Kinetic Friction: Conventional and Self-Ligating
title_sort comparative evaluation of two bracket systems’ kinetic friction: conventional and self-ligating
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9229450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35744359
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15124304
work_keys_str_mv AT vartolomeiaurelclaudiu comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT serbanoiudancosmin comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT ghigadanavalentina comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT moldovanmarioara comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT cucstanca comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT pollmannmariacristinafigueiredo comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating
AT pacurarmariana comparativeevaluationoftwobracketsystemskineticfrictionconventionalandselfligating