Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations

Vittorio Cacciafesta, Maria Francesca Sfondrini, Andrea Scribante, Catherine Klersy, Ferdinando Auricchio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

57 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to measure and compare the level of frictional resistance generated between conventional ceramic brackets (Transcend Series 6000, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot (Clarity, 3M Unitek), conventional stainless steel brackets (Victory Series, 3M Unitek), and 3 different orthodontic wire alloys: stainless steel (stainless steel, SDS Ormco, Glendora, Calif), nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti, SDS Ormco), and beta-titanium (TMA, SDS Ormco). All brackets had a 0.022-in slot, and orthodontic wire alloys were tested in 3 different sections: 0.016 in, 0.017 × 0.025 in, and 0.019 × 0.025 in. Each of the 27 bracket-archwire combinations was tested 10 times, and each test was performed with a new bracket-wire sample. Static and kinetic friction were measured on a specially designed apparatus. All data were statistically analyzed (analysis of variance and Scheffé for the bracket effect, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney for the alloy and section effects). Metal-insert ceramic brackets generated significantly lower frictional forces than did conventional ceramic brackets, but higher values than stainless steel brackets, in agreement with the findings of the few previous reports. Beta-titanium archwires had higher frictional resistances than did stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. No significant differences were found between stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. All the brackets showed higher static and kinetic frictional forces as the wire size increased. Metal-insert ceramic brackets are not only visually pleasing, but also a valuable alternative to conventional stainless steel brackets in patients with esthetic demands.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)403-409
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Volume124
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 1 2003

Fingerprint

Friction
Stainless Steel
Ceramics
Metals
Orthodontic Wires
Esthetics
Analysis of Variance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Dentistry(all)

Cite this

Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. / Cacciafesta, Vittorio; Sfondrini, Maria Francesca; Scribante, Andrea; Klersy, Catherine; Auricchio, Ferdinando.

In: American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Vol. 124, No. 4, 01.10.2003, p. 403-409.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cacciafesta, Vittorio ; Sfondrini, Maria Francesca ; Scribante, Andrea ; Klersy, Catherine ; Auricchio, Ferdinando. / Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations. In: American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2003 ; Vol. 124, No. 4. pp. 403-409.
@article{f2219cce1c1e4cc0ace80722382e92dc,
title = "Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations",
abstract = "The purpose of the study was to measure and compare the level of frictional resistance generated between conventional ceramic brackets (Transcend Series 6000, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot (Clarity, 3M Unitek), conventional stainless steel brackets (Victory Series, 3M Unitek), and 3 different orthodontic wire alloys: stainless steel (stainless steel, SDS Ormco, Glendora, Calif), nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti, SDS Ormco), and beta-titanium (TMA, SDS Ormco). All brackets had a 0.022-in slot, and orthodontic wire alloys were tested in 3 different sections: 0.016 in, 0.017 × 0.025 in, and 0.019 × 0.025 in. Each of the 27 bracket-archwire combinations was tested 10 times, and each test was performed with a new bracket-wire sample. Static and kinetic friction were measured on a specially designed apparatus. All data were statistically analyzed (analysis of variance and Scheff{\'e} for the bracket effect, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney for the alloy and section effects). Metal-insert ceramic brackets generated significantly lower frictional forces than did conventional ceramic brackets, but higher values than stainless steel brackets, in agreement with the findings of the few previous reports. Beta-titanium archwires had higher frictional resistances than did stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. No significant differences were found between stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. All the brackets showed higher static and kinetic frictional forces as the wire size increased. Metal-insert ceramic brackets are not only visually pleasing, but also a valuable alternative to conventional stainless steel brackets in patients with esthetic demands.",
author = "Vittorio Cacciafesta and Sfondrini, {Maria Francesca} and Andrea Scribante and Catherine Klersy and Ferdinando Auricchio",
year = "2003",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00501-8",
language = "English",
volume = "124",
pages = "403--409",
journal = "American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics",
issn = "0889-5406",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of friction of conventional and metal-insert ceramic brackets in various bracket-archwire combinations

AU - Cacciafesta, Vittorio

AU - Sfondrini, Maria Francesca

AU - Scribante, Andrea

AU - Klersy, Catherine

AU - Auricchio, Ferdinando

PY - 2003/10/1

Y1 - 2003/10/1

N2 - The purpose of the study was to measure and compare the level of frictional resistance generated between conventional ceramic brackets (Transcend Series 6000, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot (Clarity, 3M Unitek), conventional stainless steel brackets (Victory Series, 3M Unitek), and 3 different orthodontic wire alloys: stainless steel (stainless steel, SDS Ormco, Glendora, Calif), nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti, SDS Ormco), and beta-titanium (TMA, SDS Ormco). All brackets had a 0.022-in slot, and orthodontic wire alloys were tested in 3 different sections: 0.016 in, 0.017 × 0.025 in, and 0.019 × 0.025 in. Each of the 27 bracket-archwire combinations was tested 10 times, and each test was performed with a new bracket-wire sample. Static and kinetic friction were measured on a specially designed apparatus. All data were statistically analyzed (analysis of variance and Scheffé for the bracket effect, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney for the alloy and section effects). Metal-insert ceramic brackets generated significantly lower frictional forces than did conventional ceramic brackets, but higher values than stainless steel brackets, in agreement with the findings of the few previous reports. Beta-titanium archwires had higher frictional resistances than did stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. No significant differences were found between stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. All the brackets showed higher static and kinetic frictional forces as the wire size increased. Metal-insert ceramic brackets are not only visually pleasing, but also a valuable alternative to conventional stainless steel brackets in patients with esthetic demands.

AB - The purpose of the study was to measure and compare the level of frictional resistance generated between conventional ceramic brackets (Transcend Series 6000, 3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif), ceramic brackets with stainless steel slot (Clarity, 3M Unitek), conventional stainless steel brackets (Victory Series, 3M Unitek), and 3 different orthodontic wire alloys: stainless steel (stainless steel, SDS Ormco, Glendora, Calif), nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti, SDS Ormco), and beta-titanium (TMA, SDS Ormco). All brackets had a 0.022-in slot, and orthodontic wire alloys were tested in 3 different sections: 0.016 in, 0.017 × 0.025 in, and 0.019 × 0.025 in. Each of the 27 bracket-archwire combinations was tested 10 times, and each test was performed with a new bracket-wire sample. Static and kinetic friction were measured on a specially designed apparatus. All data were statistically analyzed (analysis of variance and Scheffé for the bracket effect, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann Whitney for the alloy and section effects). Metal-insert ceramic brackets generated significantly lower frictional forces than did conventional ceramic brackets, but higher values than stainless steel brackets, in agreement with the findings of the few previous reports. Beta-titanium archwires had higher frictional resistances than did stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. No significant differences were found between stainless steel and nickel-titanium archwires. All the brackets showed higher static and kinetic frictional forces as the wire size increased. Metal-insert ceramic brackets are not only visually pleasing, but also a valuable alternative to conventional stainless steel brackets in patients with esthetic demands.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141921983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141921983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00501-8

DO - 10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00501-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 14560270

AN - SCOPUS:0141921983

VL - 124

SP - 403

EP - 409

JO - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

JF - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

SN - 0889-5406

IS - 4

ER -