Korean J Orthod.  2018 Jul;48(4):268-280. 10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.268.

Resistance to sliding in orthodontics: misconception or method error? A systematic review and a proposal of a test protocol

Affiliations
  • 1Department of Orthodontics, Dental School, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. fabiosavoldi@live.com
  • 2Dental Materials Science, Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
  • 3Department of Orthodontics, Medical Faculty, Slovak Medical University, Bratislava, Slovakia.

Abstract

Resistance to sliding (RS) between the bracket, wire, and ligature has been largely debated in orthodontics. Despite the extensive number of published studies, the lack of discussion of the methods used has led to little understanding of this phenomenon. The aim of this study was to discuss variables affecting RS in orthodontics and to suggest an operative protocol. The search included PubMed©, Medline©, and the Cochrane Library©. References of full-text articles were manually analyzed. English-language articles published between January 2007 and January 2017 that performed an in vitro analysis of RS between the bracket, wire, and ligature were included. Study methods were analyzed based on the study design, description of materials, and experimental setup, and a protocol to standardize the testing methods was proposed. From 404 articles identified from the database search and 242 records selected from published references, 101 were eligible for the qualitative analysis, and six for the quantitative synthesis. One or more experimental parameters were incompatible and a meta-analysis was not performed. Major factors regarding the study design, materials, and experimental setup were not clearly described by most studies. The normal force, that is the force perpendicular to the sliding of the wire and one of the most relevant variable in RS, was not considered by most studies. Different variables were introduced, often acting as confounding factors. A protocol was suggested to standardize testing procedures and enhance the understanding of in vitro findings.

Keyword

Bracket; Wire; Biomaterial science

MeSH Terms

In Vitro Techniques
Ligation
Methods*
Orthodontics*

Figure

  • Figure 1 Example of a wire inserted into a bracket slot describing the first order plane (I, brown), second order plane (II, green), third order plane (III, blue), and their respective axes (apico-coronal, linguo-vestibular, and mesio-distal). In the example, a normal force (ligating force) (NF, gray arrow) is applied on the second-order plane of the wire. Because of the orthodontic force (OF, purple arrow), which can be generated either by movement of the bracket or the wire, resistance to the sliding of the wire (RS, red arrow) is created along the mesio-distal axis. In this case, the contact surface responsible for the RS is on the II order (RSII).

  • Figure 2 Flow diagram of the study selection.


Cited by  1 articles

Proposed parameters of optimal central incisor positioning in orthodontic treatment planning: A systematic review
Linda Sangalli, Domenico Dalessandri, Stefano Bonetti, Gualtiero Mandelli, Luca Visconti, Fabio Savoldi
Korean J Orthod. 2022;52(1):53-65.    doi: 10.4041/kjod.2022.52.1.53.


Reference

1. Besançon RM. The encyclopedia of physics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company;1985.
2. Jastrzebsky ZD. The nature and properties of engineering materials. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley & Sons;1976.
3. Kusy RP, Whitley JQ. Influence of archwire and bracket dimensions on sliding mechanics: derivations and determinations of the critical contact angles for binding. Eur J Orthod. 1999; 21:199–208.
Article
4. Kusy RP, Whitley JQ. Friction between different wire-bracket configurations and materials. Semin Orthod. 1997; 3:166–177.
5. Burrow SJ. Friction and resistance to sliding in orthodontics: a critical review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135:442–447.
Article
6. Kapur R, Sinha PK, Nanda RS. Comparison of frictional resistance in titanium and stainless steel brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116:271–274.
Article
7. Southard TE, Marshall SD, Grosland NM. Friction does not increase anchorage loading. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131:412–414.
Article
8. Braun S, Bluestein M, Moore BK, Benson G. Friction in perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115:619–627.
Article
9. Yeh CL, Kusnoto B, Viana G, Evans CA, Drummond JL. In vitro evaluation of frictional resistance between brackets with passive-ligation designs. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 131:704.e11–704.e22.
10. Muguruma T, Iijima M, Brantley WA, Ahluwalia KS, Kohda N, Mizoguchi I. Effects of third-order torque on frictional force of self-ligating brackets. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84:1054–1061.
Article
11. Kusy RP. Influence of force systems on archwire-bracket combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 127:333–342.
Article
12. Edwards GD, Davies EH, Jones SP. The ex vivo effect of ligation technique on the static frictional resistance of stainless steel brackets and archwires. Br J Orthod. 1995; 22:145–153.
Article
13. Suwa N, Watari F, Yamagata S, Iida J, Kobayashi M. Static-dynamic friction transition of FRP esthetic orthodontic wires on various brackets by suspension-type friction test. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2003; 67:765–771.
Article
14. Kusy RP, Whitley JQ, Prewitt MJ. Comparison of the frictional coefficients for selected archwire-bracket slot combinations in the dry and wet states. Angle Orthod. 1991; 61:293–302.
15. Tageldin H, Cadenas de Llano Pérula M, Thevissen P, Celis JP, Willems G. Resistance to sliding in orthodontics: a systematic review. Jacobs J Dent Res. 2016; 3:034.
16. Leite VV, Lopes MB, Gonini Júnior A, Almeida MR, Moura SK, Almeida RR. Comparison of frictional resistance between self-ligating and conventional brackets tied with elastomeric and metal ligature in orthodontic archwires. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014; 19:114–119.
Article
17. Fleming PS, DiBiase AT, Lee RT. Randomized clinical trial of orthodontic treatment efficiency with self-ligating and conventional fixed orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137:738–742.
Article
18. Savoldi F, Bonetti S, Dalessandri D, Mandelli G, Paganelli C. Incisal apical root resorption evaluation after low-friction orthodontic treatment using two-dimensional radiographic imaging and trigonometric correction. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015; 9:ZC70–ZC74.
Article
19. Saunders CR, Kusy RP. Surface topography and frictional characteristics of ceramic brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106:76–87.
Article
20. Peterson L, Spencer R, Andreasen G. A comparison of friction resistance for Nitinol and stainless steel wire in edgewise brackets. Quintessence Int Dent Dig. 1982; 13:563–571.
21. Husain N, Kumar A. Frictional resistance between orthodontic brackets and archwire: an in vitro study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2011; 12:91–99.
Article
22. Kim TK, Kim KD, Baek SH. Comparison of frictional forces during the initial leveling stage in various combinations of self-ligating brackets and archwires with a custom-designed typodont system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133:187.e15–187.e24.
Article
23. Oz AA, Arici N, Arici S. The clinical and laboratory effects of bracket type during canine distalization with sliding mechanics. Angle Orthod. 2012; 82:326–332.
Article
24. Huang TH, Luk HS, Hsu YC, Kao CT. An in vitro comparison of the frictional forces between archwires and self-ligating brackets of passive and active types. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34:625–632.
Article
25. Lombardo L, Wierusz W, Toscano D, Lapenta R, Kaplan A, Siciliani G. Frictional resistance exerted by different lingual and labial brackets: an in vitro study. Prog Orthod. 2013; 14:37.
Article
26. Williams CL, Khalaf K. Frictional resistance of three types of ceramic brackets. J Oral Maxillofac Res. 2014; 4:e3.
Article
27. Amaral MR, Neto PS, Pithon MM, Oliveira DD. Evaluation in vitro of frictional resistance of self-ligating esthetic and conventional brackets. Int J Odontostomatol. 2014; 8:261–266.
Article
28. Pasha A, Vishwakarma S, Narayan A, Vinay K, Shetty SV, Roy PP. Comparison of frictional forces generated by a new ceramic bracket with the conventional brackets using unconventional and conventional ligation system and the self-ligating brackets: an in vitro study. J Int Oral Health. 2015; 7:108–113.
29. Arici N, Akdeniz BS, Arici S. Comparison of the frictional characteristics of aesthetic orthodontic brackets measured using a modified in vitro technique. Korean J Orthod. 2015; 45:29–37.
Article
30. Gandini P, Orsi L, Bertoncini C, Massironi S, Franchi L. In vitro frictional forces generated by three different ligation methods. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78:917–921.
Article
31. Kim Y, Cha JY, Hwang CJ, Yu HS, Tahk SG. Comparison of frictional forces between aesthetic orthodontic coated wires and self-ligation brackets. Korean J Orthod. 2014; 44:157–167.
Article
32. Reznikov N, Har-Zion G, Barkana I, Abed Y, Redlich M. Measurement of friction forces between stainless steel wires and “reduced-friction” self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138:330–338.
Article
33. Ozturk Ortan Y, Yurdakuloglu Arslan T, Aydemir B. A comparative in vitro study of frictional resistance between lingual brackets and stainless steel archwires. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34:119–125.
Article
34. Regis S Jr, Soares P, Camargo ES, Guariza Filho O, Tanaka O, Maruo H. Biodegradation of orthodontic metallic brackets and associated implications for friction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140:501–509.
Article
35. Budd S, Daskalogiannakis J, Tompson BD. A study of the frictional characteristics of four commercially available self-ligating bracket systems. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30:645–653.
Article
36. Fourie Z, Ozcan M, Sandham A. Effect of dental arch convexity and type of archwire on frictional forces. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 136:14.e1–14.e7. discussion 14-5.
Article
37. Edwards IR, Spary DJ, Rock WP. The effect upon friction of the degradation of orthodontic elastomeric modules. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34:618–624.
Article
38. Martins MM, Teixeira AOB, Artese F, Mendes AM. Friction generated by elastomeric ligature with and without polymer coating. Braz Dent Sci. 2011; 14:9–12.
Article
39. Queiroz GV, Ballester RY, Batista De Paiva J, Neto JR, Galon GM. Comparative study of frictional forces generated by NiTi archwire deformation in different orthodontic brackets in vitro evaluation. Dental Press J Orthod. 2012; 17:45–50.
Article
40. Abbassy MA, Bakry AS. The effect of fluoride on beta titanium orthodontics wires' surface texture and friction resistance. Int J Dent Oral Sci. 2015; 2:47–52.
41. Uribe MN, Chaparro JPB, Cáceres EJG, Mazo ILP, Quijada ACR. Comparison of resistance to sliding produced by self-ligating brackets and conventional brackets ligated with conventional elastomeric ligature and low-friction ligatures. Rev Fac Odontol Univ Antioq. 2012; 23:192–206.
42. Pillai AR, Gangadharan A, Kumar S, Shah A. Comparison of the frictional resistance between archwire and different bracket system: an in vitro study. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2014; 6:Suppl 1. S150–S155.
Article
43. Kumar S, Singh S, Hamsa PRR, Ahmed S, Prasanthma , Bhatnagar A, et al. Evaluation of friction in orthodontics using various brackets and archwire combinations-an in vitro study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014; 8:ZC33–ZC36.
44. Fathimani M, Melenka GW, Romanyk DL, Toogood RW, Heo G, Carey JP, et al. Development of a standardized testing system for orthodontic sliding mechanics. Prog Orthod. 2015; 16:14.
Article
45. Voudouris JC, Schismenos C, Lackovic K, Kuftinec MM. Self-ligation esthetic brackets with low frictional resistance. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80:188–194.
Article
46. Nucera R, Lo Giudice A, Matarese G, Artemisia A, Bramanti E, Crupi P, et al. Analysis of the characteristics of slot design affecting resistance to sliding during active archwire configurations. Prog Orthod. 2013; 14:35.
Article
47. Farronato G, Maijer R, Caria MP, Esposito L, Alberzoni D, Cacciatore G. The effect of Teflon coating on the resistance to sliding of orthodontic archwires. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34:410–417.
Article
48. Alió-Sanz JJ, Claros-Stucchi M, Albaladejo A, Iglesias-Conde C, Alvarado-Lorenzo A. In vitro comparative study on the friction of stainless steel wires with and without Orthospeed® (JAL 90458) on an inclined plane. J Clin Exp Dent. 2016; 8:e141–e145.
Article
49. Whitley JQ, Kusy RP. Influence of interbracket distances on the resistance to sliding of orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132:360–372.
Article
50. Tecco S, Di Iorio D, Cordasco G, Verrocchi I, Festa F. An in vitro investigation of the influence of self-ligating brackets, low friction ligatures, and archwire on frictional resistance. Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29:390–397.
Article
51. Pliska BT, Beyer JP, Larson BE. A comparison of resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets under an increasing applied moment. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81:794–799.
Article
52. Tecco S, Di Iorio D, Nucera R, Di Bisceglie B, Cordasco G, Festa F. Evaluation of the friction of self-ligating and conventional bracket systems. Eur J Dent. 2011; 5:310–317.
Article
53. Crincoli V, Perillo L, Di Bisceglie MB, Balsamo A, Serpico V, Chiatante F, et al. Friction forces during sliding of various brackets for malaligned teeth: an in vitro study. ScientificWorldJournal. 2013; 2013:871423.
Article
54. de Lima Mendonça S, Praxedes Neto OJ, de Oliveira PT, dos Santos PB, de Sá Leitão Pinheiro FH. Comparison of friction produced by two types of orthodontic bracket protectors. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014; 19:86–91.
Article
55. Chang CJ, Lee TM, Liu JK. Effect of bracket bevel design and oral environmental factors on frictional resistance. Angle Orthod. 2013; 83:956–965.
Article
56. Galvão MB, Camporesi M, Tortamano A, Dominguez GC, Defraia E. Frictional resistance in monocrystalline ceramic brackets with conventional and nonconventional elastomeric ligatures. Prog Orthod. 2013; 14:9.
Article
57. Inami T, Tanimoto Y, Yamaguchi M, Shibata Y, Nishiyama N, Kasai K. Surface topography, hardness, and frictional properties of GFRP for esthetic orthodontic wires. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2016; 104:88–95.
Article
58. Ioi H, Yanase Y, Uehara M, Hara A, Nakata S, Nakasima A, et al. Frictional resistance in plastic preadjusted brackets ligated with low-friction and conventional elastomeric ligatures. J Orthod. 2009; 36:17–22. discussion 13.
Article
59. Matarese G, Nucera R, Militi A, Mazza M, Portelli M, Festa F, et al. Evaluation of frictional forces during dental alignment: an experimental model with 3 nonleveled brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133:708–715.
Article
60. Cordasco G, Lo Giudice A, Militi A, Nucera R, Triolo G, Matarese G. In vitro evaluation of resistance to sliding in self-ligating and conventional bracket systems during dental alignment. Korean J Orthod. 2012; 42:218–224.
Article
61. Chung M, Nikolai RJ, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Third-order torque and self-ligating orthodontic bracket-type effects on sliding friction. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79:551–557.
Article
62. Heo W, Baek SH. Friction properties according to vertical and horizontal tooth displacement and bracket type during initial leveling and alignment. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81:653–661.
Article
63. Meier MJ, Bourauel C, Roehlike J, Reimann S, Keilig L, Braumann B. Friction behavior and other material properties of nickel-titanium and titanium-molybdenum archwires following electrochemical surface refinement. J Orofac Orthop. 2014; 75:308–318.
Article
64. Murayama M, Namura Y, Tamura T, Iwai H, Shimizu N. Relationship between friction force and orthodontic force at the leveling stage using a coated wire. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013; 21:554–559.
Article
65. Seo YJ, Lim BS, Park YG, Yang IH, Ahn SJ, Kim TW, et al. Effect of tooth displacement and vibration on frictional force and stick-slip phenomenon in conventional brackets: a preliminary in vitro mechanical analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37:158–163.
Article
66. Obaisi NA, Galang-Boquiren MT, Evans CA, Tsay TG, Viana G, Berzins D, et al. Comparison of the transformation temperatures of heat-activated nickel-titanium orthodontic archwires by two different techniques. Dent Mater. 2016; 32:879–888.
Article
67. Savoldi F, Visconti L, Dalessandri D, Bonetti S, Tsoi JKH, Matinlinna JP, et al. In vitro evaluation of the influence of velocity on sliding resistance of stainless steel arch wires in a self-ligating orthodontic bracket. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2017; 20:119–125.
Article
68. Natt AS, Sekhon AK, Munjal S, Duggal R, Holla A, Gupta P, et al. A comparative evaluation of static frictional resistance using various methods of ligation at different time intervals: an in vitro study. Int J Dent. 2015; 2015:407361.
Article
69. Venâncio FR, Vedovello SAS, Tubel CAM, Degan VV, Lucato AS, Lealdim LN. Effect of elastomeric ligatures on frictional forces between the archwire and orthodontic bracket. Braz J Oral Sci. 2013; 12:41–45.
70. Pacheco MR, Oliveira DD, Neto PS, Jansen WC. Evaluation of friction in self-ligating brackets subjected to sliding mechanics: an in vitro study. Dental Press J Orthod. 2011; 16:107–115.
71. Cordasco G, Farronato G, Festa F, Nucera R, Parazzoli E, Grossi GB. In vitro evaluation of the frictional forces between brackets and archwire with three passive self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31:643–646.
Article
72. Doshi UH, Bhad-Patil WA. Static frictional force and surface roughness of various bracket and wire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139:74–79.
Article
73. Sirisaowaluk N, Kravchuk O, Ho CT. The influence of ligation on frictional resistance to sliding during repeated displacement. Aust Orthod J. 2006; 22:141–146.
74. Keith O, Jones SP, Davies EH. The influence of bracket material, ligation force and wear on frictional resistance of orthodontic brackets. Br J Orthod. 1993; 20:109–115.
Article
Full Text Links
  • KJOD
Actions
Cited
CITED
export Copy
Close
Share
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
Similar articles
Copyright © 2024 by Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors. All rights reserved.     E-mail: koreamed@kamje.or.kr