{"title":"模拟犬回缩过程中不同设计美学托槽之间摩擦力的比较评估。","authors":"Ahmed Youssef, Tarek El-Bialy, Christoph Bourauel","doi":"10.1007/s00056-022-00433-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate force loss due to friction (FR) with an emphasis on esthetic brackets and their design differences during simulated canine retraction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The tested brackets were round and sharp-cornered conventional-ligating brackets and round-cornered self-ligating brackets. The tested archwires were stainless steel (0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″, and 0.018″) archwires. A total of 90 bracket-archwire combinations in 9 equally-sized groups (n = 10) were analyzed. Canine retraction was experimentally simulated in a biomechanical set-up utilizing the custom-made orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS) using a NiTi coil spring that delivered a constant force of 1 N. The simulated retraction path was up to 4 mm. FR was compared among groups using the Welch t‑test. Significance level (α) was set to 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (28.6 ± 5.4%), while there were no significant differences in FR between the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket and the round-cornered self-ligating bracket with 0.018″ stainless steel wires. However, the round-cornered self-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (34.9 ± 5.1% and 39.3 ± 4.6%) with 0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″ stainless steel archwires, respectively. The sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed the highest FR of 72.4 ± 3.0% among the bracket systems tested in this study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed less FR when compared to sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket. Conversely, the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited greater FR when compared to the round-cornered self-ligating bracket, with an exception with respect to the 0.018″ wire. In general, FR increased with increased wire dimension.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative assessment of frictional forces between differently designed esthetic brackets during simulated canine retraction.\",\"authors\":\"Ahmed Youssef, Tarek El-Bialy, Christoph Bourauel\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00056-022-00433-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate force loss due to friction (FR) with an emphasis on esthetic brackets and their design differences during simulated canine retraction.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The tested brackets were round and sharp-cornered conventional-ligating brackets and round-cornered self-ligating brackets. The tested archwires were stainless steel (0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″, and 0.018″) archwires. A total of 90 bracket-archwire combinations in 9 equally-sized groups (n = 10) were analyzed. Canine retraction was experimentally simulated in a biomechanical set-up utilizing the custom-made orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS) using a NiTi coil spring that delivered a constant force of 1 N. The simulated retraction path was up to 4 mm. FR was compared among groups using the Welch t‑test. Significance level (α) was set to 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (28.6 ± 5.4%), while there were no significant differences in FR between the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket and the round-cornered self-ligating bracket with 0.018″ stainless steel wires. However, the round-cornered self-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (34.9 ± 5.1% and 39.3 ± 4.6%) with 0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″ stainless steel archwires, respectively. The sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed the highest FR of 72.4 ± 3.0% among the bracket systems tested in this study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed less FR when compared to sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket. Conversely, the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited greater FR when compared to the round-cornered self-ligating bracket, with an exception with respect to the 0.018″ wire. In general, FR increased with increased wire dimension.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00433-3\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/11/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00433-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative assessment of frictional forces between differently designed esthetic brackets during simulated canine retraction.
Objectives: To evaluate force loss due to friction (FR) with an emphasis on esthetic brackets and their design differences during simulated canine retraction.
Materials and methods: The tested brackets were round and sharp-cornered conventional-ligating brackets and round-cornered self-ligating brackets. The tested archwires were stainless steel (0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″, and 0.018″) archwires. A total of 90 bracket-archwire combinations in 9 equally-sized groups (n = 10) were analyzed. Canine retraction was experimentally simulated in a biomechanical set-up utilizing the custom-made orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS) using a NiTi coil spring that delivered a constant force of 1 N. The simulated retraction path was up to 4 mm. FR was compared among groups using the Welch t‑test. Significance level (α) was set to 0.05.
Results: The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (28.6 ± 5.4%), while there were no significant differences in FR between the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket and the round-cornered self-ligating bracket with 0.018″ stainless steel wires. However, the round-cornered self-ligating bracket exhibited the least FR (34.9 ± 5.1% and 39.3 ± 4.6%) with 0.018 × 0.025″ and 0.019 × 0.025″ stainless steel archwires, respectively. The sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed the highest FR of 72.4 ± 3.0% among the bracket systems tested in this study.
Conclusions: The round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket showed less FR when compared to sharp-cornered conventional-ligating bracket. Conversely, the round-cornered conventional-ligating bracket exhibited greater FR when compared to the round-cornered self-ligating bracket, with an exception with respect to the 0.018″ wire. In general, FR increased with increased wire dimension.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.