Original Research16. Weishy, the variability of roentgenographic cephalometricline of line of reference. Angle orthod, 38; 74-78, 1968.17. Walter Donald Heinlein, “Anterior teeth: Esthetics andfunction”, J Prosthet Dent 1980; 44; 389-39318. Tjan AHL, miller GD: the JGP: some esthetic factors ina smile. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:24-2819. Karkazis HC, Polyzois GL “A study of the occlusal planeorientation in complete denture construction” J OralRehabil, 14: 399-404, 1987.20. Polyzois GL. “Relationship between ala-tragus lineand natural occlusal plane. Implication in dentureprosthodontics”. Quentcssense Interna¬tional I, 17: 253255, 198621. Abrahams R, Carey PD “The use of the ala-tragus linefor occlusal plane determination in complete dentures” JDent, 7: 339-341, 1979.22. James r. Douglas, “open rest,” a new concept in theselection of the vertical dimension of occlusion, JProsthet dent; 1965; 15; 850-856550Indian Journal of Multidisciplinary Dentistry, Vol. 2, <strong>Issue</strong> 4, <strong>Aug</strong>ust-<strong>Oct</strong>ober 2012
COMPARISON OF FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE OF AESTHETIC ANDSEMI AESTHETIC SELF LIGATING BRACKETSM.S.Kannan*, R.V.Murali # , V.jayanth @ , P.R. Annamalai ~ ,Original ResearchAbstractAIM: The frictional resistance encountered during sliding mechanics has been well established in the orthodonticliterature, and it consists of complex interactions between the bracket, archwire, and method of ligation. The claimof reduced friction with self-ligating brackets is often cited as a primary advantage over conventional brackets.This study was done to compare and evaluate the frictional forces generated between fully aesthetic brackets andsemi-aesthetic self ligating brackets which are of passive form and SEM (scanning electron microscope) study ofthe Brackets after Frictional evaluation. Materials: Two types of Self-ligating aesthetic brackets, Damon Clear[Ormco] made of fully ceramic and Opal [Ultradent Products,USA] and, Two types of Self-ligating semi-aestheticbrackets, Clarity SL [3M Unitek] and Damon 3 [Ormco] both of which are made of ceramic with metal slot. Archwires with different dimensions and quality 17x25, 19x25 TMA and 17x25, 19x25 SS that came from plain strandsof wire were used for frictional comparison test. The brackets used in this study had 0.022x0.028 inch slot. Results:The Statistical tests showed significantly smaller amount of kinetic frictional forces is generated by Damon 3(semi-aesthetic self-ligating brackets). For each wire used, Damon 3 displayed significantly lower frictional forces(P≤.05) than any of the self-ligating system, followed by Opal (fully aesthetic self-ligating brackets) which generatedsmaller amount of frictional forces but relatively on the higher side when compared with Damon 3. Damonclear (fully aesthetic self-ligating brackets) generated the maximum amount of kinetic forces with all types ofwire dimensions and properties when compared to the other three types of self-ligating system. Clarity SL (semiaestheticself-ligating brackets) generated smaller amount of frictional forces when compared with Damon clearand relatively higher amount of frictional forces when compared to Opal and Damon 3.Key words: Frictional forces, Selfligating brackets, Aesthetic Selfligating, Semiaesthetic Selfligating.IntroductionT*Professor#Professor & Head@Postgraduate student~ReaderDepartment of OrthodonticsSree Balaji Dental College , Chennai, IndiaCorresponding author:Dr. M.S. KannanEmail: kannanace@gmail.comhe first self-ligating edgewise bracket Russellock was introduced by Stolzenberg toorthodontists 75 years ago, since then advancesin further bracket technology have resulted in anumber of new self ligating bracket ‘‘systems’’ andgreater interest in their use. Much of this interest isin response to information comparing the benefitsof self-ligating systems with conventional edgewisebrackets. The claim of reduced friction with selfligatingbrackets is often cited as a primary advantageover conventional brackets. Two different types ofself-ligating brackets were produced: those with aspring clip that pressed actively against the archwire,such as the Speed bracket, and self-ligating brackets,e.g. the Activa bracket whose self-ligating clip didnot press against the wire. Passive and active selfligatingappliances with many ligating mechanismswere introduced to presumably allow for efficientsliding mechanics.Self-ligating brackets are proposed to havethe potential advantages of producing morephysiologically harmonious tooth movement by notoverpowering the musculature and interrupting theperiodontal vascular supply.The frictional resistance encountered during slidingmechanics has been well established in the orthodonticliterature, and it consists of complex interactionsbetween the bracket, archwire, and method of ligation.Tooth movement associated with sliding mechanicshas been described as a series of short steps involvingoscillating tooth tipping and uprighting, rather than acontinuous, smooth, gliding process.Adherence to the tenets of evidence-basedorthodontic practice requires that, for any orthodonticintervention applied to a patient, 3 factors mustbe integrated: the relevant scientific evidence, theclinician’s expertise, and the patient’s needs andpreferences. On the topic of self-ligating bracketIndian Journal of Multidisciplinary Dentistry, Vol. 2, <strong>Issue</strong> 4, <strong>Aug</strong>ust-<strong>Oct</strong>ober 2012 551
Change language