Cited by 6Orthodontics and Dentofacial OrthopedicsDental materials and restorationsDental Trauma and Treatments

Comparison of the friction forces delivered by different elastomeric patterns and metal ligature on conventional metal brackets with a NiTi arch wire versus a self-ligating system: An in vitro study

Pieroni, Mateus, Ferraz Facury, Analia Gabriella Borges, Santamaria-Jr, Milton, Correr, Américo Bortolazzo, Correr-Sobrinho, Lourenço, Vedovello Filho, Mario, Costa, Ana Rosa, Neves, José Guilherme·2022·International Orthodontics

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to measure the frictional resistance of different types of ligatures used on conventional and self-ligating brackets. Materials and methods Monoblock (conventional) and Portia (self-ligating) brackets were used and the archwire used was nickel-titanium. On conventional brackets the ligatures tested were the Elastomeric type and steel 0.30 tie-wire. The groups were divided according to the ligature types (n=8): (1) conventional elastomeric ligature; (2) relaxed conventional elastomeric ligature; (3) elastomeric ligature in shape-8; (4) double vertical elastomeric ligatures; (5) double-crossed elastomeric ligatures; (6) crossed ligature; (7) steel wire ligature; and (8) self-ligating ligature (self-ligating bracket). A segment of five brackets, each ligature types, was mounted. The archwire, between the bracket and the ligature, was connected on Instron® Universal test machine to simulate the frictional resistance. The maximum frictional resistance was obtained, and the mean values were submitted to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the Tukey's post-hoc test (α=0.05). Results The elastomeric ligature in shape-8 showed the highest value compared with other groups (P<0.05). Although the crossed elastomeric ligature presented the lowest mean value and it was not statistically different regarding relaxed conventional elastomeric ligature, steel wire ligature and self-ligating (P≥0.05). Conclusions The frictional resistance was influenced by ligature types. Elastomeric Ligature in shape-8 showed the highest frictional force. Crossed Elastomeric Ligature had the lowest frictional force value.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ortho.2022.100633

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pieroni, M., Ferraz Facury, A. G. B., Santamaria-Jr, M., Correr, A. B., Correr-Sobrinho, L., Vedovello Filho, M., Costa, A. R., & Neves, J. G.
Affiliations
Centro Universitário Herminio Ometto de Araras (BR)
Corresponding author
Neves, José Guilherme
Venue
International Orthodontics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-06
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
100633
ISSN
1761-7227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4220704757
Cited by
6
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Orthodontics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Orthodontics › Dental materials and restorations
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Dental Trauma and Treatments
Keywords
orthodontic friction, elastomeric ligatures, self-ligating brackets, NiTi archwires
MeSH terms
Dental Alloys, Dental Stress Analysis, Humans, Materials Testing, Nickel, Orthodontic Wires, Stainless Steel, Titanium, Orthodontic Appliance Design, Orthodontic Brackets, Friction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review