Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Eur J Dent 2011; 05(03): 310-317
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1698897
Original Article
Dental Investigation Society

Evaluation of the Friction of Self-Ligating and Conventional Bracket Systems

Simona Tecco
a   Department of Oral Science, University G.D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy.
,
Donato Di Iorio
a   Department of Oral Science, University G.D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy.
,
Riccardo Nucera
a   Department of Oral Science, University G.D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy.
,
Beatrice Di Bisceglie
a   Department of Oral Science, University G.D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy.
,
Giancarlo Cordasco
b   Department of Oral Science, University of Messina, Italy.
,
Felice Festa
c   Department of Oral Science, University G.D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy.
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 September 2019 (online)

Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Objectives: This in vitro study evaluated the friction (F) generated by aligned stainless steel (SS) conventional brackets, self-ligating Damon MX© brackets (SDS Ormco, Glendora, California, USA), Time3© brackets (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, Wisconsin, USA), Vision LP© brackets (American Orthodontics), and low-friction Slide© ligatures (Leone, Firenze, Italy) coupled with various SS, nickel-titanium (NiTi), and beta-titanium (TMA) archwires. Methods: All brackets had a 0.022-inch slot, and the orthodontic archwires were 0.014-inch, 0.016-inch, 0.014×0.025-inch, 0.018×0.025-inch, and 0.019×0.025-inch NiTi; 0.017×0.025-inch TMA; and 0.019×0.025-inch SS. Each bracket-archwire combination was tested 10 times. In the test, 10 brackets of the same group were mounted in alignment on a metal bar. The archwires moved through all the 10 brackets at a crosshead speed of 0.5 mm/min (each run lasted approximately 5 min). The differences among 5 groups of brackets were analyzed through the Kruskal-Wallis test, and a Mann-Whitney test was calculated as post hoc analysis. The P value was set at 0.05. Results: Coupled with 0.014-inch NiTi and 0.016-inch NiTi, Victory Series© brackets generated the greatest F, while Damon MX© and Vision LP© brackets generated the lowest (P<.05); no significant differences were observed between Time3© brackets and Slide© ligatures. Coupled with all the rectangular archwires, Victory Series© brackets, Slide© ligatures, and Vision LP© self-ligating brackets generated significantly lower F than did Time3© and Damon MX© self-ligating brackets (P<.05). Conclusions: These findings suggest that self-ligating brackets are a family of brackets that, in vitro, can generate different levels of F when coupled with thin or thick, rectangular, or round archwires. Clinical conclusions based on our results are not possible due to the limitations of the experimental conditions. (Eur J Dent 2011;5:310-317)

Key words:

Friction - Orthodontic brackets - Ligation
 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Besancon RM (Ed.) The encyclopedia of physics. 3rd edn. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company.
  • 1985 2. Cacciafesta V, Sfondrini MF, Ricciardi A, Scribante A, Klersy C, Auricchio F. Evaluation of friction of stainless steel and esthetic self-ligating brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;124:395– 402.
  • 3 Andreasen GF, Quevedo FR. Evaluation of frictional forces in the 0.022 × 0.028 edgewise bracket in vitro. J Biomech 1970;3:151–160.
  • 4 Kapila S, Angolkar PV, Duncanson MG, Nanda RS. Evaluation of friction between edgewise stainless steel brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98:117–126.
  • 5 Rose CM, Zernik JH. Reduced resistance to sliding in ceramic brackets. J Clin Orthod 1996;30:78–84.
  • 6 Braun S, Bluestein M, Moore BK, Benson G. Friction in perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;115:619–627.
  • 7 Khambay B, Millett D, McHugh S. Evaluation of methods of archwire ligation on frictional resistance. Eur J Orthod 2004;26:327–332.
  • 8 Khambay B, Millett D, McHugh S. Archwire seating forces produced by different ligation methods and their effect on frictional resistance. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:302–308.
  • 9 Tecco S, Festa F, Caputi S, Traini T, Di Iorio D, D’Attilio M. Friction of conventional and self-ligating brackets using a 10 bracket model. Angle Orthod 2005;75:1041–1045.
  • 10 Henao SP, Kusy RP. Frictional evaluations of dental typodont models using four self-ligating designs and a conventional design. Angle Orthod 2005;75:75–85.
  • 11 Stolzenberg J. The Russell attachment and its improved advantages. Int J Orth Dent Child 1935;21:837–840.
  • 12 Stolzenberg J. The efficiency of the Russell attachment. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1946;32:572–582.
  • 13 Berger JL. The influence of the SPEED bracket’s self-ligating design on force levels in tooth movement: A comparative in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;97:219– 228.
  • 14 Sims APT, Waters NE, Birnie DJ, Pethybridge RJ. A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement in vitro using two self-ligating brackets and pre-adjusted bracket employing two types of ligation. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:377–385.
  • 15 Sims APT, Waters NE, Birnie DJ. A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement ex vivo through 3 types of pre-adjusted brackets when subjected to determined tip or torque values. Br J Orthod 1994;21:367–373.
  • 16 Read-Ward GE, Jones SP, Davies EH. A comparison of selfligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems. Br J Orthod 1997;24:309–371.
  • 17 Thomas S, Sheriff M, Birnie D. A comparative in vitro study of the frictional characteristics of two types of self-ligating brackets and two types of pre-adjusted edgewise brackets tied with elastomeric ligatures. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:589– 596.
  • 18 Thorstenson GA, Kusy RP. Resistance to sliding of selfligating brackets versus conventional stainless twin brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet (saliva) states. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2001;120:361–370.
  • 19 Voudouris JC. Interactive edgewise mechanisms: Form and function comparison with conventional edgewise brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:119–140.
  • 20 Bednar JR, Gruendeman GW, Sandrik JL. A comparative study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and arch wires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;100:513– 522.
  • 21 Ehsani S, Mandich MA, El-Bialy TH, Flores-Mir C. Frictional resistance in self-Ligating orthodontic brackets and conventionally ligated brackets. Angle Orthod 2009;79:592–601.
  • 22 Pizzoni L, Ravnholt G, Melsen B. Frictional forces related to self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:283–291 23. Angolkar PV, Kapila S, Duncanson MG Jr., Nanda RS. Evaluation of friction between ceramic brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98:499–506.
  • 24 Pratten DH, Popli K, Germane N, Gunsolley JC. Frictional resistance of ceramic and stainless steel orthodontic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;98:398–403.
  • 25 Ireland AJ, Sheriff M, McDonald F. Effect of bracket and wire composition on frictional forces. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:322–328.
  • 26 Keith O, Jones SP, Davies EH. The influence of bracket material, ligation force and wear on frictional resistance of orthodontic brackets. Br J Orthod 1993;20:109–115.
  • 27 Downing A, McCabe J, Gordon P. A study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and archwires. Br J Orthod 1994;21:349–357.
  • 28 Dickson J, Jones S. Frictional characteristics of a modified ceramic bracket. J Clin Orthod 1996;30:516–518.
  • 29 Bazakidou E, Nanda RS, Duncanson MG Jr., Sinha P. Evaluation of frictional resistance in esthetic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;112:138–144.
  • 30 Loftus BP, Årtun J, Nicholls JI, Alonzo TA, Stoner JA. Evaluation of friction during sliding tooth movement in various bracket-archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;116:336–345.
  • 31 Ogata RH, Nanda RS, Duncanson MG Jr., Sinha PK, Currier GF. Frictional resistance in stainless steel bracket-wire combinations with effects of vertical deflections. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996;109:535–590.