The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 18 , ISSUE 8 ( August, 2017 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

An in vitro Evaluation of Friction Characteristics of Conventional Stainless Steel and Self-ligating Stainless Steel Brackets with different Dimensions of Archwires in Various Bracket–archwire Combination

UB Rajasekaran, Shailesh Sandbhor, M Mohamed Ramees, Esther A Abraham

Citation Information : Rajasekaran U, Sandbhor S, Ramees MM, Abraham EA. An in vitro Evaluation of Friction Characteristics of Conventional Stainless Steel and Self-ligating Stainless Steel Brackets with different Dimensions of Archwires in Various Bracket–archwire Combination. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (8):660-664.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2102

Published Online: 00-08-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim

The purpose of this research is to compare the frictional attributes of stainless steel conventional brackets and selfligating stainless steel brackets with different dimensions of archwires.

Materials and methods

The test was carried with two sets of maxillary brackets: (1) Conventional stainless steel (Victory Series), (2) stainless steel self-ligating (SmartClip) without first premolar brackets. Stainless steel, nickel–titanium (NiTi), and beta-Ti which are the types of orthodontic wire alloys were tested in this study. To monitor the frictional force, a universal testing machine (Instron 33R 4467) that comprises 10 kg tension load cell was assigned on a range of 1 kg and determined from 0 to 2 kg, which allows moving of an archwire along the brackets. One-way analysis of variance was used to test the difference between groups. To analyze the statistical difference between the two groups, Student's t-test was used.

Results

For Victory Series in static friction, p-value was 0.946 and for kinetic friction it was 0.944; at the same time for SmartClip, the p value for static and kinetic frictional resistance was 0.497 and 0.518 respectively. Hence, there was no statistically significant difference between the NiTi and stainless steel archwires.

Conclusion

It is concluded that when compared with conventional brackets with stainless steel ligatures, self-ligating brackets can produce significantly less friction during sliding. Beta-Ti archwires expressed high amount of frictional resistance and the stainless steel archwires comprise low frictional resistance among all the archwire materials.

Clinical significance

In orthodontics, frictional resistance has always had a major role. Its ability to impair tooth movement leads to the need for higher forces to move the teeth and it extends the treatment time which results in loss of posterior anchorage. Friction in orthodontics is related with sliding mechanics when a wire is moving through one or a series of bracket slots.

How to cite this article

Sridharan K, Sandbhor S, Rajasekaran UB, Sam G, Ramees MM, Abraham EA. An in vitro Evaluation of Friction Characteristics of Conventional Stainless Steel and Selfligating Stainless Steel Brackets with different Dimensions of Archwires in Various Bracket–archwire Combination. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017;18(8):660-664.


PDF Share
  1. Frictional changes in force values caused by saliva substitution. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987 Apr;91(4):316-320.
  2. Comparative friction of orthodontic wires under dry and wet conditions. Am J Orthod 1986 Jun;89(6):485-491.
  3. Evaluation of friction of stainless steel and esthetic self-ligating brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003 Oct;124(4):395-402.
  4. Dynamic frictional behaviour of orthodontic archwires and brackets. Eur J Orthod 2004 Apr;26(2):163-170.
  5. Evaluation of friction during sliding tooth movement in various bracket-arch wire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Sep;116(3):336-345.
  6. In vitro frictional forces generated by three different ligation methods. Angle Orthod 2008 Sep;78(5):917-921.
  7. Evaluation of friction between edgewise stainless steel brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990 Aug;98(2):117-126.
  8. Frictional forces related to self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 1998 Jun;20(3):283-291.
  9. Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003 Oct;124(4):403-409.
  10. A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligation bracket systems. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994 Nov;106(5):472-480.
  11. Effects of ligation type and method on the resistance to sliding of novel orthodontic brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet states. Angle Orthod 2003 Aug;73(4):418-430.
  12. A comparison of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems. Br J Orthod 1997 Nov;24(4):309-317.
  13. The dynamic frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and arch wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994 Aug;106(2):131-138.
  14. Resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets versus conventional stainless steel twin brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet (saliva) states. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001 Oct;120(4):361-370.
  15. A study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and archwires. Br J Orthod 1994 Nov;21(4):349-357.
  16. Frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and archwires in the buccal segments. Angle Orthod 1996 Jun;66(3):215-222.
  17. Frictional resistance in orthodontic brackets with repeated use. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Oct;116(4):400-404.
  18. Comparison of the frictional coefficients for selected archwire-bracket slot combinations in the dry and wet states. Angle Orthod 1991 Winter;61(4):293-302.
  19. Influence of angulation on the resistance to sliding in fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Jan;115(1):39-51.
  20. Influence of archwire and bracket dimensions on sliding mechanics: derivations and determinations of the critical contact angles for binding. Eur J Orthod 1999 Apr;21(2):199-208.
  21. Clinical ligation forces and intraoral friction during sliding on a stainless steel archwire. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003 Apr;123(4):408-415.
  22. Friction in perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999 Jun;115(6):619-627.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.