Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Int Orthod ; 18(4): 801-808, 2020 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32763126

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.


Subject(s)
Dental Alloys/chemistry , Dental Stress Analysis/instrumentation , Orthodontic Wires , Orthodontics , Analysis of Variance , Elasticity , Humans , Materials Testing/instrumentation , Mechanical Phenomena , Nickel , Pilot Projects , Titanium
2.
Int Orthod ; 18(3): 519-527, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32417201

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of temperature variation on surface microhardness and resistance to flexion of different materials used for making a temporary dental disocclusion. METHODS: One hundred specimens were made of the following materials (n=20): glass ionomer cement (GIC); compomer (CP); composite resin (CR); Blue colour resin composite for temporary dental disocclusion (BTDD); ultraviolet colour resin composite for temporary dental disocclusion (UVTDD). They were stored in distilled water for 24hours and, subsequently, half of the specimens in each group were subjected to thermal cycling (n=10). All samples were subjected to the microhardness test (HMV-2000) and the flexural strength analysis (INSTRON). The data were submitted to parametric statistical analysis (ANOVA) and Tukey's complementary test with a significance level of 5%. In the mechanical tests, all materials except the GIC showed a statistically significant difference between the groups subjected to thermal cycling and not submitted, and thermal cycling (P<0.05) was responsible for the reduction of the values found, except for GIC. RESULTS: In the mechanical tests, all materials except the GIC showed a statistically significant difference between the groups subjected to thermal cycling and not submitted, and thermal cycling (P<0.05) was responsible for the reduction of the values found, except for GIC. For microhardness, the highest average was found for BTDD and UVTDD (P≤0.05). As for the resistance, the flexion was found that in the groups not submitted to thermal cycling there was no statistically significant difference for all materials, except for GIC, for the groups with thermal cycling the materials BTDD and UVTDD showed a statistically significant difference from GIC, however, they did not differ statistically from the CP and CR groups. CONCLUSION: BTDD and UVTDD presented higher average results of surface microhardness and, in the resistance test, the flexion of these materials behaved similarly to the CP and the CR studied. The temperature variation has an effect on the properties of these materials.


Subject(s)
Dental Cements/chemistry , Flexural Strength , Glass Ionomer Cements/chemistry , Materials Testing , Temperature , Composite Resins , Hardness , Humans , Orthodontics , Resin Cements/chemistry , Surface Properties
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...