Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2014 May-Jun;19(3):82-9.
doi: 10.1590/2176-9451.19.3.082-089.oar.

Comparative study of friction between metallic and conventional interactive self-ligating brackets in different alignment conditions

Sérgio Ricardo Jakob, Davison Matheus, Maria Cristina Jimenez-Pellegrin, Cecília Pedroso Turssi, Flávia Lucisano Botelho Amaral
Comparative Study

Comparative study of friction between metallic and conventional interactive self-ligating brackets in different alignment conditions

Sérgio Ricardo Jakob et al. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014 May-Jun.

Abstract
in English, Portuguese

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the friction between three bracket models: conventional stainless steel (Ovation, Dentsply GAC), self-ligating ceramic (In-Ovation, Denstply GAC) and self-ligating stainless steel brackets (In-Ovation R, Dentsply GAC).

Methods: Five brackets were used for each model. They were bonded to an aluminum prototype that allowed the simulation of four misalignment situations (n = 10). Three of these situations occured at the initial phase (in which a 0.016-in nickel-titanium wire was used): 1. horizontal; 2. vertical; and 3. simultaneous horizontal/vertical. One of the situations occurred at the final treatment phase: 4. no misalignment (in which a 0.019 x 0.025-inch stainless steel rectangular wire was used). The wires slipped through the brackets and friction was measured by a Universal Testing Machine.

Results: Analysis of variance followed by Tukey's Test for multiple comparisons (α = 0.05) were applied to assess the results. Significant interaction (p < 0.01) among groups was found. For the tests that simulated initial alignment, Ovation® bracket produced the highest friction. The two self-ligating models resulted in lower and similar values, except for the horizontal situation, in which In-Ovation C® showed lower friction, which was similar to the In-Ovation R® metallic model. For the no misalignment situation, the same results were observed.

Conclusion: The self-ligating system was superior to the conventional one due to producing less friction. With regard to the material used for manufacturing the brackets, the In-Ovation C® ceramic model showed less friction than the metallic ones.

Objetivo: o objetivo desse trabalho in vitro foi comparar o atrito entre três modelos de braquetes: Ovation (convencional, aço inoxidável); In-Ovation C (autoligável, cerâmico) e In-Ovation R (autoligável, aço inoxidável), todos do mesmo fabricante (Dentsply GAC).

Métodos: para cada modelo, foram utilizados cinco braquetes, colados a um protótipo de alumínio, que permitiu a simulação de quatro situações (n = 10), sendo uma delas sem desalinhamento (com utilização de fio retangular de aço inoxidável, com espessuras de 0,019" x 0,025") e outras três com desalinhamento, sendo um horizontal, um vertical e outro simultaneamente combinando ambos (com utilização de fio de níquel-titânio com espessura de 0,016"). O atrito foi mensurado por uma máquina universal de ensaios.

Resultados: os resultados obtidos foram submetidos ao teste de Análise de Variância, complementado pelo teste de comparações múltiplas de Tukey (α = 0,05). Foi observada interação significativa entre os grupos (p < 0,01). Para os ensaios que simularam a fase inicial de alinhamento, realizada com fios de NiTi, o braquete Ovation foi o que produziu o maior atrito, e os dois modelos autoligáveis produziram resultados menores e semelhantes, exceto para o ensaio de desalinhamento horizontal, onde o In-Ovation C apresentou atrito menor do que o similar metálico In-Ovation R. Na fase em que o fechamento de espaço foi simulado, os mesmos resultados foram observados.

Conclusão: pode-se concluir que o sistema de autoligável mostrou-se superior ao convencional, com elastômeros, por produzir menor atrito. Quanto ao material utilizado na confecção dos braquetes, o modelo cerâmico In-Ovation C apresentou menor atrito que os metálicos.

Keywords: Esthetics; Friction; Orthodontic brackets.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
A) Prototype especially designed for the present study. B) Vertical malalignment. C) Horizontal malalignment.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Berger J, Byloff FK. The clinical efficiency of self-ligated brackets. J Clin Orthod. 2001;35(5):304–308. - PubMed
    1. Gandini P, Orsi L, Bertoncini C, Massironi S, Franchi L. In vitro frictional forces generated by three different ligation methods. Angle Orthod. 2008;78(5):917–921. - PubMed
    1. Harradine NW. Self-ligating brackets and treatment efficiency. Clin Orthod Res. 2001;4(4):220–227. - PubMed
    1. Harradine NW. Self-ligating brackets: Where are we now? J Orthod. 2003;30(3):262–273. - PubMed
    1. Budd S, Daskalogiannakis J, Tompson D. A study of the fricctional characteristics of four commercially available self-ligating bracket systems. Eur J Orthod. 2008;30(6):645–653. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources