Abstract
Problem statement: To evaluate the frictional forces generated by five different orthodontic brackets when used in combination with stainless steel and NiTi archwires in dry conditions at physiological temperature. Approach: Five different types of maxillary canine brackets (Damon 3 MX, Step, Quick, Sprint, Mini Mono) with a slot size 0.022 inch were coupled with 0.016” and 0.019”×0.025” stainless steel and with 0.016” and 0.018”×0.025” NiTi archwires. Step, Sprint and Mini Mono were used both with traditional ligatures and with Slide ligatures. A total of 320 archwires and brackets were used; ten tests were carried out for each group of bracket-wire combination at physiological temperature and in dry state. Frictional forces were measured by Instron Universal Testing Machine. The statistical significance level was established at P<0.05. Results: Damon 3 MX and Step brackets with Slide ligatures produced statistically lower friction than Quick and conventional brackets with elastomeric ligature. Frictional force increased proportionally to the wire size; NiTi archwires presented higher frictional resistance than stainless steel archwires. Slide ligatures showed lower fictional values in comparison with elastic ligatures. Conclusion: Stainless steel brackets with new Slide ligature show frictional forces similar to self-ligating brackets with passive clip.
Highlights
In orthodontic practice, during closure of extraction spaces, tooth movement with sliding is a very common procedure (Cacciafesta et al, 2003)
In self-ligating brackets the movable spring clip converted the slot into a tube (Sfondrini et al, 2010); several previous studies demonstrated a significant decrease in friction for self-ligating brackets, compared to conventional stainless steel brackets
Post hoc pairwise comparisons showed that Damon 3 MX brackets produced significant lower friction than conventional brackets with elastomeric conventional ligatures and selfkinetic friction than stainless steel wires when used with Sprint brackets with traditional ligatures and with Mini Mono, Sprint and Step with Slide ligatures
Summary
In orthodontic practice, during closure of extraction spaces, tooth movement with sliding is a very common procedure (Cacciafesta et al, 2003). Friction is defined as “the force tangential to common boundary of two bodies in contact that resist the motion of one relative to the other. Friction may be divided into static friction, which is the force required to initiate tooth movement and is body in motion (Chimenti et al, 2008). Because tooth movement along an archwire is not continuous but occurs in a series of very short steps, static friction is considered to have more importance because it needs to be overcome each time the tooth moves a little (Cacciafesta et al, 2003). Resistance to Sliding (RS) of an archwire-bracket couple is the combined effect of 3 components: Classical Friction (FR), elastic Binding (BI) and physical Notching (NO) (Articolo et al, 2000). Adding NO component to the components of RS (Articolo et al, 2000)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
