Publication:
The Clinical and Laboratory Effects of Bracket Type During Canine Distalization with Sliding Mechanics

dc.authorscopusid56569339300
dc.authorscopusid6508173204
dc.authorscopusid12783629100
dc.contributor.authorOz, A.
dc.contributor.authorArici, N.
dc.contributor.authorArici, S.
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-21T14:28:00Z
dc.date.available2020-06-21T14:28:00Z
dc.date.issued2012
dc.departmentOndokuz Mayıs Üniversitesien_US
dc.department-temp[Oz] Abdullah Alper, Department of Orthodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Arici] Nursel, Department of Orthodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkey; [Arici] Selim, Department of Orthodontics, Ondokuz Mayis Üniversitesi, Samsun, Turkeyen_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: To compare the extent of canine movement with sliding mechanics between a self-ligating (SC) bracket and a modified twin design (MT) bracket. To test the in vitro coefficient of friction (COFs) of these two metal brackets on 0.019-×0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wires. Materials and Methods: For the clinical portion of this study, a split-mouth design was used to bond the brackets of 19 patients. Canine distalization was achieved on a 0.019-×0.025-inch, stainless-steel arch wire with a nickel-titanium, closed-coil spring strained between a mini-screw and a canine bracket. The linear and angular measurements were performed using lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before and after canine distalization. A tribometer was also used to measure the COFs of the bracket types in vitro. For comparisons, Student's t-tests for paired and unpaired samples were used at the 95% confidence level. Results: The extent of canine movement and the changes in the canine and molar teeth angles were not significantly different between the SC and MT brackets. After 8 weeks, the mean canine movements were 1.83 and 1.89 mm in the maxilla and 1.79 mm and 1.70 mm in the mandible with the SC and MT brackets, respectively. The mean COF of the MT brackets (0.21) was significantly lower than that of the SC brackets (0.37) during in vitro testing. Conclusion: It is suggested that the rate of canine distalization was not different between the two groups, although in vitro COFs of the SC bracket was higher. © 2012 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.2319/032611-215.1
dc.identifier.endpage332en_US
dc.identifier.issn0003-3219
dc.identifier.issn1945-7103
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid21875316
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84858682505
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ1
dc.identifier.startpage326en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.2319/032611-215.1
dc.identifier.volume82en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000301393200020
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ1
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherE H Angle Education Research Foundation, Incen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAngle Orthodontisten_US
dc.relation.journalAngle Orthodontisten_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectCanine Distalizationen_US
dc.subjectCoefficient of Frictionen_US
dc.subjectSelf-Ligationen_US
dc.titleThe Clinical and Laboratory Effects of Bracket Type During Canine Distalization with Sliding Mechanicsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files