Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets

Claire L. Williams, Khaled Khalaf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the static frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface in two recently introduced bracket systems and compare them to conventional ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems. Three variables were considered including the bracket system, archwire type and archwire angulation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four bracket systems were tested in vitro: Self ligating ceramic, ceramic with metal slot and module, conventional ceramic with module and conventional metal with module. A specially constructed jig and an Instron testing machine were used to measure the static frictional resistance for 0.014 inches round and 0.018 x 0.025 inches rectangular stainless steel wires at 0° and 7° angulations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: static frictional force at the bracket/archwire interface; recorded and measured in units of force (Newtons).

RESULTS: Self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems generated significantly less static frictional resistance than conventional ceramic bracket systems with the wire at both angulations (P < 0.05). Changing the wire from 0.014 round to 0.018 x 0.025 rectangular wire significantly increased frictional forces for metal slot ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems (P < 0.01). Increasing wire angulation significantly increased frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface for all four types of bracket systems tested (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional ceramic, self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems should give improved clinical performance, matching that of conventional metal brackets.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere3
Pages (from-to)1-7
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research
Volume4
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Fingerprint

Ceramics
Metals
Stainless Steel

Keywords

  • friction
  • ceramics
  • orthodontic brackets
  • corrective orthodontics
  • orthodontic wires

Cite this

Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets. / Williams, Claire L.; Khalaf, Khaled.

In: Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research, Vol. 4, No. 4, e3, 01.01.2014, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Williams, Claire L. ; Khalaf, Khaled. / Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets. In: Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research. 2014 ; Vol. 4, No. 4. pp. 1-7.
@article{049497e1202e4e1898a7ff9c9d176208,
title = "Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: To investigate the static frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface in two recently introduced bracket systems and compare them to conventional ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems. Three variables were considered including the bracket system, archwire type and archwire angulation.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four bracket systems were tested in vitro: Self ligating ceramic, ceramic with metal slot and module, conventional ceramic with module and conventional metal with module. A specially constructed jig and an Instron testing machine were used to measure the static frictional resistance for 0.014 inches round and 0.018 x 0.025 inches rectangular stainless steel wires at 0° and 7° angulations.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: static frictional force at the bracket/archwire interface; recorded and measured in units of force (Newtons).RESULTS: Self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems generated significantly less static frictional resistance than conventional ceramic bracket systems with the wire at both angulations (P < 0.05). Changing the wire from 0.014 round to 0.018 x 0.025 rectangular wire significantly increased frictional forces for metal slot ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems (P < 0.01). Increasing wire angulation significantly increased frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface for all four types of bracket systems tested (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional ceramic, self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems should give improved clinical performance, matching that of conventional metal brackets.",
keywords = "friction, ceramics, orthodontic brackets, corrective orthodontics, orthodontic wires",
author = "Williams, {Claire L.} and Khaled Khalaf",
note = "ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS The author report no conflicts of interest related to this study.",
year = "2014",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5037/jomr.2013.4403",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
pages = "1--7",
journal = "Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research",
issn = "2029-283X",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets

AU - Williams, Claire L.

AU - Khalaf, Khaled

N1 - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS The author report no conflicts of interest related to this study.

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the static frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface in two recently introduced bracket systems and compare them to conventional ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems. Three variables were considered including the bracket system, archwire type and archwire angulation.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four bracket systems were tested in vitro: Self ligating ceramic, ceramic with metal slot and module, conventional ceramic with module and conventional metal with module. A specially constructed jig and an Instron testing machine were used to measure the static frictional resistance for 0.014 inches round and 0.018 x 0.025 inches rectangular stainless steel wires at 0° and 7° angulations.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: static frictional force at the bracket/archwire interface; recorded and measured in units of force (Newtons).RESULTS: Self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems generated significantly less static frictional resistance than conventional ceramic bracket systems with the wire at both angulations (P < 0.05). Changing the wire from 0.014 round to 0.018 x 0.025 rectangular wire significantly increased frictional forces for metal slot ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems (P < 0.01). Increasing wire angulation significantly increased frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface for all four types of bracket systems tested (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional ceramic, self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems should give improved clinical performance, matching that of conventional metal brackets.

AB - OBJECTIVES: To investigate the static frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface in two recently introduced bracket systems and compare them to conventional ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems. Three variables were considered including the bracket system, archwire type and archwire angulation.MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four bracket systems were tested in vitro: Self ligating ceramic, ceramic with metal slot and module, conventional ceramic with module and conventional metal with module. A specially constructed jig and an Instron testing machine were used to measure the static frictional resistance for 0.014 inches round and 0.018 x 0.025 inches rectangular stainless steel wires at 0° and 7° angulations.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: static frictional force at the bracket/archwire interface; recorded and measured in units of force (Newtons).RESULTS: Self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems generated significantly less static frictional resistance than conventional ceramic bracket systems with the wire at both angulations (P < 0.05). Changing the wire from 0.014 round to 0.018 x 0.025 rectangular wire significantly increased frictional forces for metal slot ceramic and conventional metal bracket systems (P < 0.01). Increasing wire angulation significantly increased frictional resistance at the bracket/archwire interface for all four types of bracket systems tested (P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONS: Compared to conventional ceramic, self ligating ceramic and metal slot ceramic bracket systems should give improved clinical performance, matching that of conventional metal brackets.

KW - friction

KW - ceramics

KW - orthodontic brackets

KW - corrective orthodontics

KW - orthodontic wires

U2 - 10.5037/jomr.2013.4403

DO - 10.5037/jomr.2013.4403

M3 - Article

VL - 4

SP - 1

EP - 7

JO - Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research

JF - Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research

SN - 2029-283X

IS - 4

M1 - e3

ER -