Assessment of minimum force required to initiate sliding of stainless steel wire in ceramic (monocrystalline and polycrystalline) and stainless steel preadjusted edgewise brackets using stainless steel and elastomeric ligation techniques – An in vitro study

Krishna J Ranpura, Sangeeta Shah, Dhaval Somani, Keyur Soni, Tilak Parikh, Sejal Patel
{"title":"Assessment of minimum force required to initiate sliding of stainless steel wire in ceramic (monocrystalline and polycrystalline) and stainless steel preadjusted edgewise brackets using stainless steel and elastomeric ligation techniques – An in vitro study","authors":"Krishna J Ranpura, Sangeeta Shah, Dhaval Somani, Keyur Soni, Tilak Parikh, Sejal Patel","doi":"10.4103/inpc.inpc_7_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To compare the force required to initiate sliding of rectangular stainless steel wire in monocrystalline ceramic bracket v/s polycrystalline ceramic bracket v/s stainless steel bracket using stainless steel ligation technique and to compare the force required to initiate sliding of rectangular stainless steel wire in monocrystalline ceramic bracket v/s polycrystalline ceramic bracket v/s stainless steel bracket using elastomeric ligation technique. Methods: The archwire was pulled in a vertical direction by the testing machine, until the resistance was overcome and the archwire started to slide through the bracket. The force to overcome resistance and to initiate sliding of the archwire was measured. Results: In metal brackets, there is minimum resistance to sliding as compared to the two different ceramic brackets. Among the two ceramic brackets polycrystalline bracket offered more resistance to sliding then monocrystalline bracket. Although SS ligation offered less resistance to sliding then elastomeric ligation in all three bracket types, the difference between the two ligation systems is not statistically significant. Conclusions: In maximum anchorage cases metal bracket along with SS ligation should be used to reduce the frictional resistance, enabling the use of lighter forces and eventually conserving the anchorage.","PeriodicalId":14257,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Preventive and Clinical Dental Research","volume":"37 1","pages":"17 - 21"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Preventive and Clinical Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/inpc.inpc_7_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the force required to initiate sliding of rectangular stainless steel wire in monocrystalline ceramic bracket v/s polycrystalline ceramic bracket v/s stainless steel bracket using stainless steel ligation technique and to compare the force required to initiate sliding of rectangular stainless steel wire in monocrystalline ceramic bracket v/s polycrystalline ceramic bracket v/s stainless steel bracket using elastomeric ligation technique. Methods: The archwire was pulled in a vertical direction by the testing machine, until the resistance was overcome and the archwire started to slide through the bracket. The force to overcome resistance and to initiate sliding of the archwire was measured. Results: In metal brackets, there is minimum resistance to sliding as compared to the two different ceramic brackets. Among the two ceramic brackets polycrystalline bracket offered more resistance to sliding then monocrystalline bracket. Although SS ligation offered less resistance to sliding then elastomeric ligation in all three bracket types, the difference between the two ligation systems is not statistically significant. Conclusions: In maximum anchorage cases metal bracket along with SS ligation should be used to reduce the frictional resistance, enabling the use of lighter forces and eventually conserving the anchorage.
使用不锈钢和弹性结扎技术在陶瓷(单晶和多晶)和不锈钢预调整边缘支架中启动不锈钢丝滑动所需的最小力的评估。体外研究
目的:比较单晶陶瓷支架v/s多晶陶瓷支架v/s不锈钢支架采用不锈钢结扎技术启动矩形不锈钢丝滑动所需的力,比较单晶陶瓷支架v/s多晶陶瓷支架v/s不锈钢支架采用弹性结扎技术启动矩形不锈钢丝滑动所需的力。方法:由试验机沿垂直方向拉弓丝,直至克服阻力,弓丝开始滑过支架。测量了克服阻力引起弓丝滑动的力。结果:与两种不同的陶瓷托槽相比,金属托槽的滑动阻力最小。在两种陶瓷支架中,多晶支架比单晶支架具有更强的抗滑动能力。虽然在所有三种支架类型中SS结扎比弹性结扎提供更小的滑动阻力,但两种结扎系统之间的差异没有统计学意义。结论:在最大锚固病例中,应使用金属托槽联合SS结扎来减少摩擦阻力,使使用更轻的力,最终保留锚固。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信