Current products and practices: Self-ligating brackets: Where are we now?

Journal of Orthodontics

Volumn 30, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 262-273

  Harradine, N W T ^a  

^a BRISTOL DENTAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Clinical tips; Self ligation; Treatment effectiveness

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DENTAL CARE; FRICTION; HUMAN; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHODONTICS;

DENTAL STRESS ANALYSIS; FRICTION; HUMANS; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCE DESIGN; ORTHODONTIC BRACKETS;

EID: 0642339284     PISSN: 14653125     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ortho/30.3.262     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Stolzenberg J. The Russell attachment and its improved advantages. Int J Orthod Dent Children 1935;21:837-840.
2. Wildman AJ. Round table-the Edgelok bracket. J Clin Orthod 1972;6:613-623.
3. Berger JL. The SPEED appliance: a 14 year update on this unique self-ligating orthodontic mechanism. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;105:217-223.
4. Harradine N W T, Birnie DJ. The clinical use of Activa self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996;109:319-328.
5. Damon DH. The rationale, evolution and clinical application of the self-ligating bracket. Clin Orthod Res 1998;1:52-61.
6. Damon DH. The Damon low friction bracket: a biologically compatible straight-wire system. J Clin Orthod 1998;32:670-680.
7. Taloumis LJ, Smith TM, Hondrum SO, Lorton L. Force decay and deformation of orthodontic elastomeric ligatures. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;111:1-11.
8. Maijer R, Smith DC. Time saving with self-ligating brackets. J Clin Orthod 1990;24:29-31.
9. Shivapuja PK, Berger J. A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligation bracket systems. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994;106:472-480.
10. Thorstenson BS, Kusy RP. Resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets versus conventional stainless steel twin brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and wet (saliva) states. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2001;120:361-370. (Pubitemid 33601789)
11. Sims A P T, Waters NE, Birnie DJ, Pethybridge RJ. A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement in vitro using two self-ligating brackets and a pre-adjusted bracket employing two types of ligation. Eur J Orthod 1993;15:377-385.
12. Sims A P T, Waters NE, Birnie DJ. A comparison of the forces required to produce tooth movement ex vivo through three types of preadjusted brackets when subjected to determined tip or torque values. Br J Orthod 1994;21:367-373.
13. Berger JL. The influence of the SPEED bracket's self-ligating design on force levels in tooth movement: a comparative in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990;97:219-228.
14. Voudouris JC. Interactive edgewise mechanisms: form and function comparison with conventional edgewise brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;111:119-140.
15. Thomas S, Birnie DJ, Sherriff M. A comparative in vitro study of the frictional characteristics of two types of self ligating brackets and two types of preadjusted edgewise brackets tied with elastomeric ligatures. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:589-596. (Pubitemid 128492299)
16. Kapur R, Sinha PK, Nanda RS. Frictional resistance of the Damon SL bracket. J Clin Orthod 1998;32:485-489.
17. Pizzoni L, Raunholt G, Melsen B. Frictional forces related to self-ligating brackets. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:283-291. (Pubitemid 128492285)
18. Meling TR, Ødegaard J, Holthe K, Segner D. The effect of friction on the bending stiffness of orthodontic beams: a theoretical and in vitro study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997;112:41-49.
19. Loftus BP, Ârtun J, Nicholls JI, Alonzo TA, Stoner JA. Evaluation of friction during sliding tooth movement in various bracket-archwire combinations. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;116:336-345.
20. Read-Ward GE Jones SP, Davies EH. A comparison of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic bracket systems. Br J Orthod 1997;24:309-317.
21. Thorstenson BS, Kusy RP. Comparison of resistance to sliding between different self-ligating brackets with second-order angulation in the dry and saliva states. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;121:472-482. (Pubitemid 40433048)
22. Braun S, Bluestein M, Moore BK, Benson G. Friction in perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999;115:619-627.
23. O'Reilly D, Dowling PA, Lagerstrom L, Swartz ML. An exvivo investigation into the effect of bracket displacement on resistance to sliding. Br J Orthod 1999;26:219-227.
24. Pilon J G M, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Maltha JC. Magnitude of orthodontic forces and rate of bodily tooth movement. An experimental study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996;110:16-23.
25. Koenig HA, Burstone CJ. Force systems from an ideal arch-large deflection considerations. Angle Orthod 1989;59:11-16. (Pubitemid 19069101)
26. Harradine N W T. Self-ligating brackets and treatment efficiency. Clin Orthod Res 2001;4:220-227. (Pubitemid 33351681)
27. Matasa CG (Ed.). Self-engaging brackets: passive vs. active. Orthodont Materials Insider 1996;9:5-11.
28. Meling TR, Ødegaard J. The effect of temperature on the elastic responses to longitudinal torsion of rectangular nickeltitanium archwires. Angle Orthod 1998;68:357-368. (Pubitemid 128543203)
29. Santoro M, Nicolay OF, Cangialosi TJ. Pseudoelasticity and thermoelasticity of nickel titanium alloys: a clinically oriented review. Part 1: deactivation forces. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2001;119:594-603. (Pubitemid 33601223)
30. Thorstenson BS, Kusy RP. Effect of archwire size and material on the resistance to sliding of self-ligating brackets with secondorder angulation in the dry state. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;122:295-305. (Pubitemid 40432978)
31. Khouri SA. The Bendistal pliers: a solution for distal end bending of super-elastic wires. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1998;114:675-676.
32. Eberting JJ, Straja SR, Tuncay OC. Treatment time, outcome and patient satisfaction comparisons of Damon and conventional brackets. Clin Orthod Res 2001;4:228-234. (Pubitemid 33351682)