不同舌侧矫治系统摩擦力的实验研究

发布时间：2018-06-13 03:26

本文选题：舌侧托槽 + 摩擦力　；参考：《暨南大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的探讨三种舌侧托槽分别和四种弓丝组合时，在两种不同的结扎方式下，后牙段摩擦力的差异。方法在干燥、室温的条件下，采用2种结扎方式：实验一组，结扎丝结扎；实验二组，弹性结扎圈结扎，分别测试3种不同的舌侧托槽：e-brace个性化舌侧托槽、STb舌侧托槽、普特舌侧托槽，和四种不同弓丝：0.016英寸镍钼合金圆丝（β钛丝，简称以下TMA丝）、0.016英寸不锈钢（stainless steel wire,以下简称SS丝）圆丝、0.016×0.022英寸镍钼合金方丝、0.016×0.022英寸不锈钢方丝，结扎时，在后牙弓段所产生的最大静摩擦力及平均动摩擦力。结果 1.实验一组与实验二组，即结扎丝结扎与弹性结扎圈结扎，，无论是最大静摩擦力还是平均动摩擦力，在同种弓丝和同种托槽的条件下的摩擦力大小差异都有统计学意义，结扎丝结扎时产生的摩擦力小于弹性结扎圈结扎； 2.无论是最大静摩擦力还是平均动摩擦力，用相同的结扎方式和相同尺寸、相同材质的弓丝组合时，两实验组中e-brace个性化舌侧托槽的摩擦力，均比STb舌侧托槽以及普特舌侧托槽大，且有统计学意义（P0.01）,但是STb舌侧托槽与普特舌侧托槽间摩擦力的差异大多并无统计学意义； 3.四种弓丝间的摩擦力比较：在同种托槽时，同尺寸的方型弓丝，SS丝的摩擦力相对TMA丝小，且有统计学意义（P0.05）； 4.通过多元线性回归分析，在影响摩擦力的因素中，对摩擦力影响大小的因素依次为：托槽的种类、弓丝、结扎方式。结论 1.在相同状态下，即同种弓丝同种结扎方式时，3种舌侧托槽的最大静摩擦力均大于平均动摩擦力； 2.相同条件下弹性结扎圈结扎比结扎丝结扎的摩擦力大； 3. e-brace个性化舌侧托槽的摩擦力明显大于STb、普特舌侧托槽； 4.方型弓丝的摩擦力大于圆形弓丝； 5.托槽的种类、弓丝和结扎方式都是影响舌侧矫治系统摩擦力的影响因素。其中，托槽种类对摩擦力的的影响最大。
[Abstract]:Objective to explore the difference of friction in posterior teeth under two different ligation modes when three lingual brackets and four arch wires were combined. Methods under the condition of drying and room temperature, two kinds of ligation methods were adopted: experimental group 1, ligation of silk, experimental group 2, elastic ligation ring ligation, Three kinds of tongue side brackets: 1: e-brace, 3 different tongue side brackets: STB, Putt tongue side brackets, and 4 different bow wires: 0. 016 inch nickel molybdenum alloy round wire (尾-titanium wire) were tested. The circular wire of 0.016 脳 0.022 inch Ni-Mo alloy square wire is 0.016 脳 0.022 inch stainless steel square wire. The maximum static friction force and the average dynamic friction force in the posterior arch are obtained during ligation. Result 1. The maximum static friction force and average dynamic friction force of experiment group one and experimental group two, that is, ligation of wire ligation and elastic ligation ring, have statistical significance under the same arch wire and the same bracket. The friction produced by ligation is less than that by elastic ligation; 2. No matter the maximum static friction force or the average dynamic friction force, with the same ligation mode, the same size and the same material of bow wire combination, the friction force of the tongue side bracket in the two experimental groups was individualized. Both of them were larger than those of STB and Putt, but there was no significant difference in friction between STB and Putt. 3. Comparison of friction between four kinds of bow wires: in the same bracket, the friction force of the same size square arch wire SS wire is smaller than that of TMA wire, and has statistical significance (P 0.05); 4. By multivariate linear regression analysis, among the factors affecting friction, the order of factors affecting friction is: the type of bracket, bow wire, ligation mode. Conclusion 1. Under the same condition, that is, the maximum static friction force of the three tongue side brackets is higher than the average dynamic friction force when the same arch wire is ligated in the same way; 2. Under the same condition, the friction force of elastic ligation ring is greater than that of ligation wire. 3. The friction force of e-brace individualized tongue side bracket is obviously higher than that of STB, Putt tongue side bracket; 4. The friction force of square arch wire is greater than that of circular arch wire; 5. The types of brackets, arch wire and ligation are the factors that affect the friction of lingual orthodontic system. Among them, the type of bracket has the greatest effect on friction.
【学位授予单位】：暨南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：R783.5

【参考文献】