Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Effect of dental arch convexity and type of archwire on frictional forces


Fourie, Z; Özcan, M; Sandham, A (2009). Effect of dental arch convexity and type of archwire on frictional forces. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136(1):14e1-14e7.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Friction measurements in orthodontics are often derived from models by using brackets placed on flat models with various straight wires. Dental arches are convex in some areas. The objectives of this study were to compare the frictional forces generated in conventional flat and convex dental arch setups, and to evaluate the effect of different archwires on friction in both dental arch models. METHODS: Two stainless steel models were designed and manufactured simulating flat and convex maxillary right buccal dental arches. Five stainless steel brackets from the maxillary incisor to the second premolar (slot size, 0.22 in, Victory, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and a first molar tube were aligned and clamped on the metal model at equal distances of 6 mm. Four kinds of orthodontic wires were tested: (1) A. J. Wilcock Australian wire (0.016 in, G&H Wire, Hannover, Germany); and (2) 0.016 x 0.022 in, (3) 0.018 x 0.022 in, and (4) 0.019 x 0.025 in (3M Unitek GmbH, Seefeld, Germany). Gray elastomeric modules (Power O 110, Ormco, Glendora, Calif) were used for ligation. Friction tests were performed in the wet state with artificial saliva lubrication and by pulling 5 mm of the whole length of the archwire. Six measurements were made from each bracket-wire combination, and each test was performed with new combinations of materials for both arch setups (n = 48, 6 per group) in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 20 mm/min). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Significant effects of arch model (P = 0.0000) and wire types (P = 0.0000) were found. The interaction term between the tested factors was not significant (P = 0.1581) (2-way ANOVA and Tukey test). Convex models resulted in significantly higher frictional forces (1015-1653 g) than flat models (680-1270 g) (P <0.05). In the flat model, significantly lower frictional forces were obtained with wire types 1 (679 g) and 3 (1010 g) than with types 2 (1146 g) and 4 (1270 g) (P <0.05). In the convex model, the lowest friction was obtained with wire types 1 (1015 g) and 3 (1142 g) (P >0.05). Type 1 wire tended to create the least overall friction in both flat and convex dental arch simulation models.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Friction measurements in orthodontics are often derived from models by using brackets placed on flat models with various straight wires. Dental arches are convex in some areas. The objectives of this study were to compare the frictional forces generated in conventional flat and convex dental arch setups, and to evaluate the effect of different archwires on friction in both dental arch models. METHODS: Two stainless steel models were designed and manufactured simulating flat and convex maxillary right buccal dental arches. Five stainless steel brackets from the maxillary incisor to the second premolar (slot size, 0.22 in, Victory, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) and a first molar tube were aligned and clamped on the metal model at equal distances of 6 mm. Four kinds of orthodontic wires were tested: (1) A. J. Wilcock Australian wire (0.016 in, G&H Wire, Hannover, Germany); and (2) 0.016 x 0.022 in, (3) 0.018 x 0.022 in, and (4) 0.019 x 0.025 in (3M Unitek GmbH, Seefeld, Germany). Gray elastomeric modules (Power O 110, Ormco, Glendora, Calif) were used for ligation. Friction tests were performed in the wet state with artificial saliva lubrication and by pulling 5 mm of the whole length of the archwire. Six measurements were made from each bracket-wire combination, and each test was performed with new combinations of materials for both arch setups (n = 48, 6 per group) in a universal testing machine (crosshead speed: 20 mm/min). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Significant effects of arch model (P = 0.0000) and wire types (P = 0.0000) were found. The interaction term between the tested factors was not significant (P = 0.1581) (2-way ANOVA and Tukey test). Convex models resulted in significantly higher frictional forces (1015-1653 g) than flat models (680-1270 g) (P <0.05). In the flat model, significantly lower frictional forces were obtained with wire types 1 (679 g) and 3 (1010 g) than with types 2 (1146 g) and 4 (1270 g) (P <0.05). In the convex model, the lowest friction was obtained with wire types 1 (1015 g) and 3 (1142 g) (P >0.05). Type 1 wire tended to create the least overall friction in both flat and convex dental arch simulation models.

Statistics

Citations

1 citation in Web of Science®
3 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

96 downloads since deposited on 03 Mar 2010
8 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Center for Dental Medicine > Clinic for Fixed and Removable Prosthodontics
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Date:July 2009
Deposited On:03 Mar 2010 16:29
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 13:54
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0889-5406
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.06.026

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Preview
Content: Accepted Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations