Award Date


Degree Type


Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)


Dental Medicine

First Committee Member

Brendan O'Toole

Second Committee Member

Bob Martin

Third Committee Member

Clifford Seran

Fourth Committee Member

Mohamed Trabia

Number of Pages



Purpose: The demands of an all esthetic fixed orthodontic appliance system are ever increasing in today's world. Frictional values of an esthetic, fixed orthodontic appliance system are needed to evaluate their clinical effectiveness for orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate the frictional values of various esthetic orthodontic archwires ligated to an esthetic orthodontic bracket.

Methods: Three types of stainless steel and nickel titanium alloy (niti) esthetic orthodontic archwires (epoxy, poly, plastic) in four sizes (.016, .018, .017 x .025, .019 x .025 inches) were ligated to both a stainless steel bracket system and a ceramic (esthetic) bracket system and pulled by a Universal testing machine for 90 seconds. Two types of control wires were also tested (stainless steel, niti). Each of these wires was tested 10 times. The mean frictional values were recorded for each wire in pounds. An ANOVA analysis was done to compare frictional differences between the different esthetic fixed bracket systems and a T-test was done to compare the frictional differences between wires tested in stainless steel brackets and those tested in ceramic brackets. Thickness of each of the esthetic archwires was measured with digital calipers and the means recorded.

Results: Of the 14 groups tested using the ANOVA, only 1 was not significant. Of the 13 statistically significant groups, all but 4 of those groups showed that the non-coated archwires systems had increased frictional values. Of the 28 t-tests done to compare frictional differences between archwires tested with stainless steel brackets and those tested with ceramic brackets, 22 were statistically significant. In the 22 significant groups, all but three showed a statistically significant increase in friction in wires tested using ceramic brackets. Of the three types of esthetic archwires measured, the Poly coated archwire had a mean thickness of .001 inches greater than that of the Epoxy and Plastic coated archwires

Conclusions: The non-coated (non-esthetic) archwires had significantly more friction than the coated (esthetic) archwires except for the .016 Niti Plastic Coated Archwire and .018 SS Epoxy Coated Archwire. All rectangular coated archwires had less friction than the non-coated controls. The coated (esthetic) archwires pulled through a ceramic (esthetic) bracket system all had significantly greater friction than those pulled through a stainless steel bracket system except for the .018 Niti Epoxy archwire. The Poly coated archwires had the most friction of the esthetically coated archwires while pulled through a passive arch bracket system. The .001 inch increase in diameter thickness of the Poly coated archwires was most likely the cause of the increased friction.


Archwires; Coated; Dental materials; Esthetic; Friction; Orthodontic appliances; Orthodontics; PIastic


Biomechanics | Biomedical and Dental Materials | Dental Materials | Orthodontics and Orthodontology

File Format


Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas




IN COPYRIGHT. For more information about this rights statement, please visit