作者: Robert P. Kusy , John Q. Whitley
DOI: 10.1016/J.SODO.2003.08.007
关键词:
摘要: Abstract Fluids other than saliva are being used to quantify the sliding effectiveness of archwires within bracket slots. Are these fluids valid substitutes for saliva? And if so, under what conditions they acceptable? To evaluate efficacy using artificial saliva, coefficients friction were measured four media: a control, dry state; whole human saliva; deionized water; and five salivas (Moi-Stir, Orex, Salivart, Saliva Substitute, Xero-Lube). For eight conditions, both static kinetic on two couples, each comprised an 0.021" × 0.025" beta-titanium (TMA) archwire against 0.022 polycrystalline alumina (Lumina) bracket. Using Instron testing machine, slot was drawn at 10 mm/min past normal or ligation forces: 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000 centi-Newtons (1 cN ≈ 1 g). From regression analysis versus frictional forces, standard errors estimate, as well their correlation statistical probabilities, determined. Corresponding values are: 0.31 (human saliva), 0.48 (dry), 0.45 (water), 0.57 0.84 (artificial salivas). Similar obtained friction: namely, 0.26 0.53 0.55 0.93 all data sets greater 0.86 ( P