Kim, Kyung Sook
(Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
,
Han, Se Jik
(Department of Medical Engineering, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University)
,
Lee, Tae-Hee
(Department of Orthodontics, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University)
,
Park, Tae-Joon
(Department of Orthodontics, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University)
,
Choi, Samjin
(Department of Biomedical Engineering, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University)
,
Kang, Yoon-Goo
(Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University)
,
Park, Ki-Ho
(Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University)
Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the surface composition, roughness, and relative friction of metal clips from various ceramic self-ligating brackets. Methods: Six kinds of brackets were examined. The control group (mC) consisted of interactive metal self-ligating brackets while the e...
Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the surface composition, roughness, and relative friction of metal clips from various ceramic self-ligating brackets. Methods: Six kinds of brackets were examined. The control group (mC) consisted of interactive metal self-ligating brackets while the experimental group (CC, EC, MA, QK, and WA) consisted of interactive ceramic self-ligating brackets. Atomic force microscopy-lateral force microscopy and scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to analyze the surface of each bracket clip. Results: All the clips in the experimental groups were coated with rhodium except for the QK clip. The results showed that the QK clip had the lowest average roughness on the outer surface, followed by the MA, EC, WA, and CC clips. However, the CC clip had the lowest average roughness on the inner surface, followed by the QK, WA, MA, and EC clips. The QK clip also had the lowest relative friction on the outer surface, followed by the MA, EC, CC, and WA clips. Likewise, the CC clip had the lowest relative friction on the inner surface, followed by the QK, WA, MA, and EC clips. Conclusions: The surface roughness and relative friction of the rhodium-coated clips were generally higher than those of the uncoated clips.
Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze the surface composition, roughness, and relative friction of metal clips from various ceramic self-ligating brackets. Methods: Six kinds of brackets were examined. The control group (mC) consisted of interactive metal self-ligating brackets while the experimental group (CC, EC, MA, QK, and WA) consisted of interactive ceramic self-ligating brackets. Atomic force microscopy-lateral force microscopy and scanning electron microscopy-energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy were used to analyze the surface of each bracket clip. Results: All the clips in the experimental groups were coated with rhodium except for the QK clip. The results showed that the QK clip had the lowest average roughness on the outer surface, followed by the MA, EC, WA, and CC clips. However, the CC clip had the lowest average roughness on the inner surface, followed by the QK, WA, MA, and EC clips. The QK clip also had the lowest relative friction on the outer surface, followed by the MA, EC, CC, and WA clips. Likewise, the CC clip had the lowest relative friction on the inner surface, followed by the QK, WA, MA, and EC clips. Conclusions: The surface roughness and relative friction of the rhodium-coated clips were generally higher than those of the uncoated clips.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
제안 방법
The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of white coating on ceramic self-ligating bracket clips on the surface roughness and friction of the metal surface using AFM-LFM and SEM-EDS.
However, few studies have focused on the surface roughness and friction of self-ligating bracket clips, even though the self-ligating bracket clip serves as the fourth wall of the slot. This study was the first to observe the surface chemical composition, surface roughness, and relative friction of various ceramic self-ligating bracket clips using AFM-LFM and SEM-EDS.
대상 데이터
The results of the chemical component analysis for each clip obtained using SEM-EDS are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The main components on the outer clip surface of mC and QK were cobalt (34.07% and 38.87%, respectively), chrome (20.84% and 18.39%, respectively), and nickel (33.11% and 14.91%, respectively). The main components on the inner clip surface of mC were cobalt (32.
데이터처리
A one-way ANOVA was performed and the results were verified using Scheffe’s post hoc test.
The Shapiro–Wilks and Levene’s tests were used to examine the normality of the distributions and the equality of variances between groups, respectively. One-way ANOVAs were used to compare the Sa and Fa values of the six types of bracket clips, which were followed by Scheffe analysis. The statistical significance was considered for p-values less than 0.
성능/효과
The sample size of each bracket was 30 in this study, and the clip was removed from each bracket. A pilot study and power analysis showed that a sample size of at least 14 brackets per group was needed for a 20% effect size change to represent a statistically significant difference in the surface roughness. The sample size was calculated a power of 0.
Saunders and Kusy10 found no significant difference between the friction in the polycrystalline alumina bracket and monocrystalline alumina bracket, although the surface of the former was rougher than that of the latter, because of the internal chemical structure of the ceramic bracket. In this study, rhodium-coated clips except the CC clip were found to have a rougher surface and higher friction on the outer and inner surfaces than the mC clip. However, the friction is likely to be caused by several factors, and hence, it is not solely determined by the surface roughness.
82%). The main component on the outer and inner clip surfaces of CC (43.76% and 57.46%, respectively), EC (69.04% and 88.24%, respectively), MA (82.72% and 100%, respectively), and WA (48.10% and 71.33%, respectively) was rhodium.
There were no significant differences in the Sa value for CC (28.7 ± 16.8), QK (50.4 ± 39.5), and mC (20.5 ± 11.2), but the outer surfaces of EC (100.4 ± 46.3), MA (75.6 ± 46.9), and WA (66.4 ± 30.5) were significantly rougher than that of mC.
There have been no previous studies on the surface composition of EC, MA, and WA. This study showed for the first time that the main components on the outer and inner surfaces of EC (69.04% and 88.24%, respectively), MA (82.72% and 100%, respectively), and WA (48.10% and 71.33%, respectively) was rhodium, similar to CC. The study also showed that the main components on the surface of clip in QK were cobalt, chromium, and nickel and that the surface was not rhodium-coated, which was consistent with the previous study.
후속연구
However, the friction is likely to be caused by several factors, and hence, it is not solely determined by the surface roughness.16Further research is needed to understand these other factors better. In addition, the friction between the selfligating bracket and the archwire occurs not only in the bracket clip but also in the bracket slot; hence, further research is needed to determine the surface roughness and friction of the bracket slot.
16 Further research is needed to understand these other factors better. In addition, the friction between the selfligating bracket and the archwire occurs not only in the bracket clip but also in the bracket slot; hence, further research is needed to determine the surface roughness and friction of the bracket slot. The clinical performance of brackets also depends on diverse synergistic effects, including corrosion due to saliva, mouth-washing solutions, and galvanic corrosion between two materials.
참고문헌 (23)
1 Carneiro GK Roque JA Segundo AS Suzuki H Evaluation of stiffness and plastic deformation of active ceramic self-ligating bracket clips after repetitive opening and closure movements Dental Press J Orthod 2015 20 45 50
2 Harradine NW Self-ligating brackets: where are we now? J Orthod 2003 30 262 273 14530427
3 Buljan ZI Ribaric SP Abram M Ivankovic A Spalj S In vitro oxidative stress induced by conventional and self-ligating brackets Angle Orthod 2012 82 340 345 21913853
4 Albuquerque CG Correr AB Venezian GC Santamaria M Jr Tubel CA Vedovello SA Deflection flexural strength effects roughness aesthetic-coated orthodontic wires Braz Dent J 2017 28 40 45 28301016
5 Shintcovsk RL Knop LA Gandini LG Jr Martins LP Pires AS Comparison surface characteristics and chemical composition of conventional metallic and nickel-free brackets Braz Oral Res 2015 29 10.1590/1807-3107BOR-2015.vol29.0022
6 Varma DP Chidambaram S Reddy KB Vijay M Ravindranath D Prasad MR Comparison of galvanic corrosion potential of metal injection molded brackets to that of conventional metal brackets with nickel-titanium and copper nickel-titanium archwire combinations J Contemp Dent Pract 2013 14 488 495 24171995
7 Gkantidis N Zinelis S Karamolegkou M Eliades T Topouzelis N Comparative assessment of clinical performance of esthetic bracket materials Angle Orthod 2012 82 691 697 22229823
8 Pratten DH Popli K Germane N Gunsolley JC Frictional resistance of ceramic and stainless steel orthodontic brackets Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990 98 398 403 2239837
9 Bednar JR Gruendeman GW Sandrik JL A comparative study of frictional forces between orthodontic brackets and arch wires Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991 100 513 522 1962604
10 Saunders CR Kusy RP Surface topography and frictional characteristics of ceramic brackets Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994 106 76 87 8017353
11 Zinelis S Eliades T Eliades G Makou M Silikas N Comparative assessment of the roughness, hardness, and wear resistance of aesthetic bracket materials Dent Mater 2005 21 890 894 16045979
12 Lee GJ Park KH Park YG Park HK A quantitative AFM analysis of nano-scale surface roughness in various orthodontic brackets Micron 2010 41 775 782 20646928
13 Choi S Lee S Cheong Y Park KH Park HK Park YG Ultrastructural effect of self-ligating bracket materials on stainless steel and superelastic NiTi wire surfaces Microsc Res Tech 2012 75 1076 1083 22419658
14 Park KH Yoon HJ Kim SJ Lee GJ Park HK Park YG Surface roughness analysis of ceramic bracket slots using atomic force microscope Korean J Orthod 2010 40 294 303
15 Choi S Hwang EY Park HK Park YG Correlation between frictional force and surface roughness of orthodontic archwires Scanning 2015 37 399 405 26018223
16 Rudge P Sherriff M Bister D A comparison of roughness parameters and friction coefficients of aesthetic archwires Eur J Orthod 2015 37 49 55 25086030
17 Misra R Li J Cannon GC Morgan SE Nanoscale reduction in surface friction of polymer surfaces modified with Sc3 hydrophobin from Schizophyllum commune Biomacromolecules 2006 7 1463 1470 16677027
18 Nanjundan K Vimala G Evaluation of frictional resistance and surface characteristics after immersion of orthodontic brackets and wire in different chemical solutions: a comparative in vitrostudy Indian J Dent Res 2016 27 513 520 27966510
21 Angolkar PV Kapila S Duncanson MG Jr Nanda RS Evaluation of friction between ceramic brackets and orthodontic wires of four alloys Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990 98 499 506 2248227
22 Choi SH Kang DY Hwang CJ Surface roughness of three types of modern plastic bracket slot floors and frictional resistance Angle Orthod 2014 84 177 183 23767940
23 Choi S Park KH Cheong Y Kim HK Park YG Park HK Changes in ultrastructure and properties of bracket slots after orthodontic treatment with bicuspid extraction Scanning 2011 33 25 32 21271608
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.