Mechanical and topographic evaluation of esthetic brackets and its relation to frictional resistance

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the frictional characteristics of conventional ceramic versus metal insert ceramic brackets in combination with stainless steel and Teflon-coated stainless steel archwires. Materials and Methods: Twenty brackets each, of ceramic and metal insert ceramic Maxillary canine preadjusted edgewise brackets 0.022 × 0.028 in slot) and 20 archwires, each of stainless steel and Teflon-coated stainless steel (0.019 × 0.025 in) were tested for frictional resistance. Friction was evaluated in a simulated Tidy's design apparatus on universal testing machine. The kinetic friction data were analyzed using Student's 't' test. The effects of surface characteristics on frictional resistance were qualitatively assessed using scanning electron microscope. Results: Metal insert ceramic brackets generated significantly lower kinetic frictional resistance than the conventional ceramic brackets with Teflon-coated stainless steel archwires ( P P Conclusion: Metal insert ceramic bracket with stainless steel archwire is the best possible combination among the materials studied because it generated the least frictional resistance during simulated tooth movement.