Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512020000600027 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the attractiveness of different types of esthetic orthodontic wires by laypeople and dentists. Methods: Five different types of orthodontic wires were evaluated: three esthetic wires (Teflon-coated, epoxy resin-coated and rhodium-coated wires), and two metallic wires (stainless steel and NiTi), as control. Monocrystalline ceramic brackets were installed in the maxillary arch of a patient presenting good dental alignment. The five evaluated wires were attached to the orthodontic appliance with an esthetic silicone elastic and photographed. The photographs were evaluated by 163 individuals, 110 dentists and 53 laypeople. The data were statistically evaluated by two-way ANOVA and one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey tests. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the attractiveness among the wires evaluated; the most esthetic was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the Teflon-coated wire, with no significant difference from the stainless steel and NiTi control archwires. There was no significant difference between the groups of evaluators. Conclusion: The most attractive was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the least attractive wire was the Teflon-coated wire, without statistically significant difference to the stainless steel and NiTi wires, used as control. |
id |
DPI-1_009c5b8d6445d23554fa3c00fb3af546 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2176-94512020000600027 |
network_acronym_str |
DPI-1 |
network_name_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wiresOrthodontic wiresEstheticsOrthodonticsABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the attractiveness of different types of esthetic orthodontic wires by laypeople and dentists. Methods: Five different types of orthodontic wires were evaluated: three esthetic wires (Teflon-coated, epoxy resin-coated and rhodium-coated wires), and two metallic wires (stainless steel and NiTi), as control. Monocrystalline ceramic brackets were installed in the maxillary arch of a patient presenting good dental alignment. The five evaluated wires were attached to the orthodontic appliance with an esthetic silicone elastic and photographed. The photographs were evaluated by 163 individuals, 110 dentists and 53 laypeople. The data were statistically evaluated by two-way ANOVA and one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey tests. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the attractiveness among the wires evaluated; the most esthetic was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the Teflon-coated wire, with no significant difference from the stainless steel and NiTi control archwires. There was no significant difference between the groups of evaluators. Conclusion: The most attractive was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the least attractive wire was the Teflon-coated wire, without statistically significant difference to the stainless steel and NiTi wires, used as control.Dental Press International2020-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512020000600027Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.25 n.6 2020reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodonticsinstname:Dental Press International (DPI)instacron:DPI10.1590/2177-6709.25.6.027-032.oarinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBatista,Deric MeschiariFaccini,MelissaValarelli,Fabricio PinelliCançado,Rodrigo HermontOliveira,Renata CristinaOliveira,Ricardo Cesar Gobbi deFreitas,Karina Maria Salvatoreeng2021-01-18T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2176-94512020000600027Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/dpjoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpartigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com2177-67092176-9451opendoar:2021-01-18T00:00Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
title |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
spellingShingle |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires Batista,Deric Meschiari Orthodontic wires Esthetics Orthodontics |
title_short |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
title_full |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
title_fullStr |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
title_full_unstemmed |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
title_sort |
Attractiveness of different esthetic orthodontic wires |
author |
Batista,Deric Meschiari |
author_facet |
Batista,Deric Meschiari Faccini,Melissa Valarelli,Fabricio Pinelli Cançado,Rodrigo Hermont Oliveira,Renata Cristina Oliveira,Ricardo Cesar Gobbi de Freitas,Karina Maria Salvatore |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Faccini,Melissa Valarelli,Fabricio Pinelli Cançado,Rodrigo Hermont Oliveira,Renata Cristina Oliveira,Ricardo Cesar Gobbi de Freitas,Karina Maria Salvatore |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Batista,Deric Meschiari Faccini,Melissa Valarelli,Fabricio Pinelli Cançado,Rodrigo Hermont Oliveira,Renata Cristina Oliveira,Ricardo Cesar Gobbi de Freitas,Karina Maria Salvatore |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Orthodontic wires Esthetics Orthodontics |
topic |
Orthodontic wires Esthetics Orthodontics |
description |
ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the attractiveness of different types of esthetic orthodontic wires by laypeople and dentists. Methods: Five different types of orthodontic wires were evaluated: three esthetic wires (Teflon-coated, epoxy resin-coated and rhodium-coated wires), and two metallic wires (stainless steel and NiTi), as control. Monocrystalline ceramic brackets were installed in the maxillary arch of a patient presenting good dental alignment. The five evaluated wires were attached to the orthodontic appliance with an esthetic silicone elastic and photographed. The photographs were evaluated by 163 individuals, 110 dentists and 53 laypeople. The data were statistically evaluated by two-way ANOVA and one-way ANOVA, followed by Tukey tests. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the attractiveness among the wires evaluated; the most esthetic was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the Teflon-coated wire, with no significant difference from the stainless steel and NiTi control archwires. There was no significant difference between the groups of evaluators. Conclusion: The most attractive was the rhodium-coated wire, followed by the epoxy resin-coated wire and, finally, the least attractive wire was the Teflon-coated wire, without statistically significant difference to the stainless steel and NiTi wires, used as control. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512020000600027 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512020000600027 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/2177-6709.25.6.027-032.oar |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.25 n.6 2020 reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics instname:Dental Press International (DPI) instacron:DPI |
instname_str |
Dental Press International (DPI) |
instacron_str |
DPI |
institution |
DPI |
reponame_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
collection |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
artigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com |
_version_ |
1754122398870798336 |