The role of friction in orthodontics

Pacheco, Mariana Ribeiro; Jansen, Wellington Corrêa; Oliveira, Dauro Douglas

doi:10.1590/s2176-94512012000200028

Cited by 29 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is in accordance to the second working hypothesis and partially agrees with data published by the above mentioned authors [4]. Although the insertion of a metal slot in the ceramic bracket aimed to combine the reduced frictional force generated by the stainless steel bracket with the aesthetics of ceramics, several studies showed higher frictional forces for the ceramic bracket with metal reinforced slot compared to the stainless steel type [9,10]. This difference could be due to the inaccurate fitting of the metal to the ceramic and to their different expansion coefficients [18].…”

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackesupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Most studies identify higher static frictional forces for monocrystalline ceramic brackets than polycrystalline ones [4,[18][19][20], but there is also research reporting the opposite result [19,22]. Other studies did not find significant differences between the two types of ceramic brackets, both having similar surface roughness [9]. The inconsistency between studies may be attributed to the differences in methodology and materials used.…”

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding the biological variables, it is generally accepted that saliva, through its lubricating effect, causes a decrease in friction. This entails individualization of treatment in patients with xerostomia or those receiving saliva-lowering drugs [9]. Other biological variables such as accumulation of bacterial plaque or biodegradation of orthodontic materials can contribute to the increase of frictional forces within the orthodontic system.…”

Section: Polycrystalline Aluminamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This result is in contradiction with the fifth working hypothesis. Although some authors claim that wet conditions (saliva) reduce frictional forces [9], others [23,24] consider that saliva plays an insignificant role in orthodontic mechanics.…”

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

In vitro Evaluation of Static Frictional Forces at the Bracket-archwire Interface

Dragomirescu¹,

Rizescu²,

Mihai³

et al. 2019

Rev. Chim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this research is to compare the static frictional forces generated by different bracket-archwire couples. The study group consisted of three types of ceramic brackets (polycrystalline alumina with stainless steel slot, polycrystalline alumina and monocrystalline alumina), one stainless steel bracket and two types of archwires (0.016` NiTi and 0.019x0.025` SS). Brackets corresponding to the upper right quadrant (form upper right central incisor to the upper right second premolar) were bonded on standardized maxillary models and elastomeric ligatures were used to secure the archwire to the bracket system. An in-vitro experiment was conducted using a testing machine designed to measure the compression and traction force, both in dry and wet testing conditions. The results indicated statistically significant differences between most bracket-archwire groups. According to the data obtained, stainless steel brackets produced the lowest static frictional forces, regardless of test conditions and orthodontic archwire type. Polycrystalline ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot generated higher static frictional forces than stainless steel brackets, but lower than ceramic brackets when combined with the 0.019`�0.025` SS archwire. No significant differences were found between polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets. Experiments performed with 0.019�0.025` SS archwire produced greater static frictional forces than those with 0.016` NiTi wire. Static frictional forces were not significantly influenced by the test conditions.

show abstract

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackesupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Polycrystalline Aluminamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Between Stainless Steel Brackets (M1) and All Ceramic Brackementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

In vitro Evaluation of Static Frictional Forces at the Bracket-archwire Interface

Dragomirescu¹,

Rizescu²,

Mihai³

et al. 2019

Rev. Chim.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…13 The resistance in the orthodontic tooth movement is influenced directly by the type of the materials used. 14,15 NiTi demonstrates the relatively high frictional coefficient and surface roughness, and low hardness, but its elastic characteristic makes it excellent for the levelling and alignment of the teeth. 6,8 Differences in the friction that were detected between two measurements on the same wire could be attributed to the mild curving of the wire.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The coating of a NiTi alloy has a greater impact on the mechanical properties than the acidity of saliva

Acev¹,

Katić²,

Turco³

et al. 2018

Mater. Tehnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of the acidity of saliva on changes to the surface roughness, friction and microhardness of NiTi alloys with various coatings. Three types of commercially available NiTi archwires: uncoated, rhodium coated and nitrified (dimension 0.508×0.508 mm, 10 cm long) were immersed in 10 mL of artificial saliva with the pH ranging from 4.8 to 6.6 for a period of 28 d. Surface roughness, friction and microhardness were analyzed and compared to the unexposed as-received wires. These mechanical properties were influenced by the wire coating with a moderate-to-high effect size (p£0.005; h 2 =0.132-0.309). The uncoated wire had a lower maximum roughness depth after exposure to pH 6.6 and 5.5 than the unexposed wire (p=0.026; h 2 =0.346). The friction was significantly increased only in the rhodium-coated NiTi at pH 4.8 compared to the lower acidities and the unexposed wire (p=0.005; h 2 =0.437). No correlation was found between pH, surface roughness, friction and microhardness, respectively. The coating of a NiTi alloy has a greater impact on the mechanical properties than the acidity does. A rhodium coating makes the alloy harder, induces a rougher surface and more friction. Nitrification does not alter the alloy as much. The relation between acidity and mechanical properties is not linear. A high acidity of 4.8 induces a high friction, but only in rhodium-coated NiTi. A lower acidity does not change the friction significantly.Cilj {tudije je bil ovrednotiti vpliv kislosti sline na spremembe povr{inske hrapavosti, trenja in mikrotrdote biokompatibilne NiTi zlitine z razli~nimi opla{~enji. Avtorji so za svoje preiskave uporabili tri vrste komercialno dosegljivih NiTi ortodontskih pritrjevalnih`ic: neopla{~eno, opla{~eno z rodijem in nitrificirano (dimenzij 0,508 mm × 0,508 mm, dol`ine 10 cm). @ice so 28 dni potapljali v 10 ml umetne sline s pH vrednostjo med 4,8 in 6,6. Nato so izvedli analize povr{inske hrapavosti, trenja in mikrotrdote v slino namo~enih`ic in jih primerjali z nenamo~enimi izhodnimi`icami. Na mehanske lastnosti je imelo opla{~enje`ic zmeren do znaten vpliv (p£0.005; h 2 =0,132-0,309). Neopla{~ena`ica je imela manj{o maksimalno globino hrapavosti po izpostavitvi pH 6,6 in 5,5 kot`ica, ki slini ni bila izpostavljena (p=0,026; h 2 =0,346). Trenje se je znatno pove~alo samo pri z rodijem opla{~eni NiTi`ici pri pH 4,8 v primerjavi z manj{imi kislostmi in pri s slino neizpostavljeni`ici (p=0,005; h 2 =0,437). Avtorji niso na{li nobene povezave med pH, povr{insko hrapavostjo, trenjem in mikrotrdoto. Opla{~enje NiTi zlitine ima ve~ji vpliv na mehanske lastnosti kot kislost. Opla{~enje z rodijem naredi zlitino tr{o, inducira bolj grobo povr{ino in pove~a trenje. Nitrifikacija bistveno ne spremeni zlitine. Zveza med kislostjo in mehanskimi lastnostmi ni linearna. Velika kislost 4,8 inducira trenje, vendar samo pri z rodijem opla{~enih NiTi`icah. Manj{a kislost pomembno ne spremeni trenja.

show abstract

Comparison of force loss during sliding of low friction and conventional TMA orthodontic archwires

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The goal was to measure and compare the amount of force loss during tooth movement guided by archwires, including a newly introduced low-friction titanium molybdenum alloy (TMA), conventional TMA, and stainless steel archwires. Methods The force loss was measured using a specialized biomechanical set-up, the orthodontic measurement and simulation system (OMSS). A total of 30 specimen were used (10 low-friction TMA (TMA-Low), 10 conventional TMA (TMA-C), and 10 stainless steel (SS) archwires, each having a dimension of 0.016 × 0.022 inches). The conventional and low friction TMA archwires served as test groups, while the SS archwires served as the control group. Results The mean values of force loss between the three types of wires (TMA‑C, TMA-Low, and SS) were significantly different (p < 0.0001). The highest mean force loss during sliding movement was found in the conventional TMA group (72.1%), followed by low friction TMA (48.8%) and stainless steel wires (33.7%) in a descending order. Conclusion The friction property of the low friction TMA archwire was superior to the conventional TMA archwire but was still inferior to the stainless steel archwire.

show abstract

The role of friction in orthodontics

Cited by 29 publications

References 23 publications

In vitro Evaluation of Static Frictional Forces at the Bracket-archwire Interface

In vitro Evaluation of Static Frictional Forces at the Bracket-archwire Interface

The coating of a NiTi alloy has a greater impact on the mechanical properties than the acidity of saliva

Comparison of force loss during sliding of low friction and conventional TMA orthodontic archwires

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About