Force delivery modification of removable thermoplastic appliances using Hilliard precision thermopliers for tipping an upper central incisor

Wiechens, Bernhard; Brockmeyer, Phillipp; Erfurth-Jach, Teresa; Hahn, Wolfram

doi:10.1007/s00784-022-04560-4

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another in vitro study 13 evaluated the force delivered by aligners modified through different-sized divots (heights from 0.022 to 0.142 mm) for tipping an upper central incisor in the vestibular and palatal directions. This study showed that a horizontal force of 0.35 to 0.60 N for tipping was reached with the divot of 0.041 mm height.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An in vitro study 12 has verified the ability of aligners by measuring forces and moments with 1 mm thick divots to control rotational movement of the central incisor when compared to aligners without divots. Another in vitro study 13 evaluated the force delivered by aligners modified through different‐sized divots (heights from 0.022 to 0.142 mm) for tipping an upper central incisor in the vestibular and palatal directions. This study showed that a horizontal force of 0.35 to 0.60 N for tipping was reached with the divot of 0.041 mm height.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In vitro biomechanics of divot use, and their placement, in orthodontic aligner therapy

Kaur,

Khurelbaatar,

Mah

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionTo evaluate biomechanics of an aligner utilizing divots and the effect of their vertical placement on the right maxillary central incisor.MethodsAn in vitro Orthodontic SIMulator (OSIM) was used to test forces and moments generated by aligners incorporating divots. The OSIM arch was scanned to generate a. STL version that was modified to create four models by placing divots on different positions of the right central maxillary incisor: GI – divots on gingival‐third of lingual surface and incisal‐third of labial surface; GM – divots on gingival‐third of lingual surface and middle‐third of labial surface; MI – divots on middle‐third of lingual surface and incisal‐third of labial surface; MM – divots on middle‐third of lingual surface and middle‐third of labial surface. Aligners (n = 30/model) were fabricated using a 0.75 mm thick polyethylene terephthalate material and Biostar® machine following the manufacturer's recommendations. A one‐way MANOVA followed by one‐way ANOVA (α = 0.05) was utilized to test effect of models on buccolingual force (Fy) and mesiodistal moment (Mx) at 0.20 mm of lingual displacement of the right maxillary central incisor.ResultsMean Mx for GI (−5.68 ± 7.38 Nmm), GM (3.75 ± 5.54 Nmm), MI (−4.27 ± 1.48 Nmm) and MM (1.96 ± 0.99 Nmm) models showed statistical differences between GI and GM, GI and MM, GM and MI and MI and MM. GI exerted the largest Fy (1.87 ± 0.75 N) followed by GM (1.10 ± 0.47 N), MI (0.70 ± 0.23 N) and MM (0.28 ± 0.08 N) with significant differences between GI and GM, GI and MI, GI and MM and GM and MM models.ConclusionsVertical divot placement on a right central incisor had a significant effect on aligner biomechanics. Buccolingual forces exerted by models GI, GM and MI were within the range suggested by literature for bodily tooth movement without major root tipping for GM and MI models.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%