| Title |
Stiffness comparison of mushroom and straight SS and TMA lingual archwires
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Progress in Orthodontics, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40510-016-0140-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luca Lombardo, Antonella Carlucci, Mario Palone, Francesco Mollica, Giuseppe Siciliani |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study is to investigate the relative stiffness of straight and mushroom lingual archwires of different diameters, cross sections and alloys, plotting their load/deflection graphs and using a modified three-point bending test. Fujita's mushroom archwires and straight lingual archwires of different diameters, cross sections and alloys were derived by a virtual set-up of an equal malocclusion and were cut at their straight distal portion. These distal portions were tested using a modified three-point bending test by an Instron 4467 dynamometer and the forces, were exerted at 1-mm deflection and were compared on each resulting load/deflection curve by means of ANOVA (p < 0.05). All upper lingual mushroom wires exerted significantly lower forces than the straight wire. Lower mushroom archwires were stiffer than their upper counterparts, which were longer and featured inset bends. In the lower arch, similar levels of forces were recorded for the two types of wire. Load-deflection curves were higher for the straight wires, and stiffness increased proportionally with their diameter. The stiffness of an archwire is a function of its diameter, length and the alloy it is made from. In lower lingual wires, there is little difference in stiffness between mushroom and straight wires, but in upper wires, the straight version is considerably stiffer. The greater bearing effect exhibited by the straight wire in the working and finishing phases makes it less susceptible to bowing effect and therefore preferable for sliding mechanics during en masse retraction, particularly in the upper arch. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 52% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 September 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Progress in Orthodontics
#159
of 255 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,878
of 331,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Progress in Orthodontics
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 255 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.