ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the force degradation and deformation over time of an open-closed and open coil spring. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 40 NiTi springs were divided into 2 groups according to the manufacturer (20 specimens per group): Morelli™ (Sorocaba, SP, Brazil) and Orthopli™ (Philadelphia, PA, USA). Then, they were subdivided into 2 groups according to the type of spring (n=10): open spring and open-closed spring. The springs were submitted to the initial compression test in a Universal Test Machine (Instron) in 43.3% of the initial length and analyzed in 3 points (0.5mm, 3.25mm and 6.5mm). After this, the springs were activated with a 240 gf and those maintained for 4 weeks in artificial saliva in the oven at 37°C, and analyzed by a new compression test with the same initial parameters. Scanning Electron Microscopy/Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM/EDS) analyzed the spring's morphology. Two-way repeated measures Analysis of Variance was applied for each brand and extension of compression. Student t-test with correction of Bonferroni was used to compare open spring vs open-closed springs and pairwise t-test was used to compare initial vs final period. The level of significance was set at 95% in all tests. The most representative images were selected (SEM/EDS). RESULTS: The Orthopli™ open-closed spring showed a statistically higher deformation (14.52±0.37) in relation to open spring (14.85±0.19) after 4 weeks (P<0.05). No statistical difference was observed between the types of Morelli™ springs (P>0.05). Orthopli™ open-closed spring showed force values statistically higher than the open spring in the initial and final time (P<0.05). Regardless of the type of spring, the initial force was significantly higher than the final force (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The orthodontist should not rely on the indicated force range without considering the type of spring (open or open-closed), the manufacturer and the amount of compression of the spring.
