A comparison of different ligation methods on friction.

INTRODUCTION An elastomeric module with a polymeric coating has been developed to reduce the friction of sliding mechanics. This in-vitro study examined the stability of the coating and compared the frictional properties of coated modules with those of other common ligation methods. METHODS Six ligation methods (regular uncoated, slick [coated], conventional silver, easy-to-tie, silicone-impregnated, and standard silver modules) were used with standard stainless steel brackets and 0.019 x 0.025-in archwires, and resistance to movement was measured. Two self-ligating (Speed [Strite Industries, Cambridge, Ontario, Canada] and Damon 2 [Sybron Dental Specialities Ormco, Orange, Calif]) brackets were also tested. RESULTS The Damon 2 self-ligating brackets produced less friction than the other ligation methods, followed by the coated modules. There was no significant difference between the frictional resistance of brackets ligated with regular uncoated, silicone-impregnated, and easy-to-tie modules. Speed self-ligating brackets produced less friction than regular uncoated, conventional silver, and standard silver modules. The frictional properties of coated modules were not significantly affected by repeating the test 5 times or by storage in saliva for a week. CONCLUSIONS Damon 2 brackets produced no recordable friction of ligation. Coated modules produced 50% less friction than all other ligation methods except Damon 2. The coating was resistant to the simulated effects of the oral environment. Different methods of human saliva application were found to affect the frictional properties of the coating.

[1]  R J Nikolai,et al.  A comparative study of frictional resistances between orthodontic bracket and arch wire. , 1980, American journal of orthodontics.

[2]  E Harrington,et al.  Factors affecting friction in the pre-adjusted appliance. , 2004, European journal of orthodontics.

[3]  D C Tidy,et al.  Frictional forces in fixed appliances. , 1989, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[4]  S. Jones,et al.  A Comparison of Self-Ligating and Conventional Orthodontic Bracket Systems , 1997 .

[5]  Peter Rock,et al.  The effect of ligation method on friction in sliding mechanics. , 2003, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[6]  D. Millett,et al.  Evaluation of methods of archwire ligation on frictional resistance. , 2004, European journal of orthodontics.

[7]  E H Hixon,et al.  On force and tooth movement. , 1970, American journal of orthodontics.

[8]  R S Quinn,et al.  A reassessment of force magnitude in orthodontics. , 1985, American journal of orthodontics.

[9]  R. Kusy,et al.  Sliding mechanics of coated composite wires and the development of an engineering model for binding. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[10]  A. Ireland,et al.  Resistance to sliding with 3 types of elastomeric modules. , 2005, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[11]  B P Loftus,et al.  A model for evaluating friction during orthodontic tooth movement. , 2001, European journal of orthodontics.

[12]  W. Proffit,et al.  Effect of ion implantation of TMA archwires on the rate of orthodontic sliding space closure. , 1998, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[13]  J. Nickel,et al.  Clinical ligation forces and intraoral friction during sliding on a stainless steel archwire. , 2003, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[14]  R. Kusy,et al.  Evaluation of titanium brackets for orthodontic treatment: Part II--The active configuration. , 1998, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[15]  S. Jones,et al.  A comparison of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems. , 1997, British journal of orthodontics.

[16]  Sims Mr,et al.  Root resorption in bicuspid intrusion. A scanning electron microscope study. , 1982 .

[17]  N. Harradine,et al.  Self-ligating brackets and treatment efficiency. , 2008, Clinical orthodontics and research.

[18]  B. K. Moore,et al.  Friction in perspective. , 1999, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[19]  Claudio Chimenti,et al.  Friction of orthodontic elastomeric ligatures with different dimensions. , 2005, The Angle orthodontist.

[20]  Yukio Kojima,et al.  Numerical simulation of canine retraction by sliding mechanics. , 2005, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[21]  R. Kusy,et al.  Influence of angulation on the resistance to sliding in fixed appliances. , 1999, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[22]  R P Kusy,et al.  Friction between different wire-bracket configurations and materials. , 1997, Seminars in orthodontics.

[23]  R. Kusy,et al.  Comparison of resistance to sliding between different self-ligating brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and saliva states. , 2002, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[24]  L Lorton,et al.  Force decay and deformation of orthodontic elastomeric ligatures. , 1997, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[25]  Richard P. McLaughlin,et al.  Systemized Orthodontic Treatment Mechanics , 2001 .

[26]  R. Kusy,et al.  Influence of archwire and bracket dimensions on sliding mechanics: derivations and determinations of the critical contact angles for binding. , 1999, European journal of orthodontics.

[27]  N. Waters,et al.  A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement in vitro using two self-ligating brackets and a pre-adjusted bracket employing two types of ligation. , 1993, European journal of orthodontics.