Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Comparative Evaluation of Frictional Resistance Between Conventional, Self-Ligating, and Ceramic Brackets Using Different Archwire Materials: An In Vitro Study
View through CrossRef
Background Frictional resistance at the bracket-archwire interface is a critical determinant of force delivery during sliding mechanics. Bracket design, slot material, ligation method, and archwire alloy may modify static and kinetic friction, thereby influencing clinical efficiency during alignment and space closure. Methods This in vitro experimental study compared frictional resistance among three 0.022-inch slot bracket systems: conventional stainless steel brackets with elastomeric ligation, passive selfligating stainless steel brackets, and polycrystalline ceramic brackets with elastomeric ligation. Three archwire materials were tested: 0.019 x 0.025-inch stainless steel, nickel-titanium, and beta-titanium. Ninety bracket-archwire assemblies were prepared, with 10 specimens per bracket-wire combination. Testing was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min under artificial saliva lubrication at 37 degrees C. Static frictional resistance and kinetic frictional resistance were recorded in Newtons. Data were analysed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests. Results Mean static friction differed significantly by bracket type and wire material (p<0.001). Self-ligating brackets showed the lowest overall static friction (1.42 +/- 0.32 N), followed by conventional stainless steel brackets (2.37 +/- 0.46 N), whereas ceramic brackets showed the highest values (3.29 +/- 0.58 N). Stainless steel archwires produced the lowest mean static friction (1.67 +/- 0.48 N), nickel-titanium produced intermediate values (2.33 +/- 0.67 N), and beta-titanium produced the highest values (3.08 +/- 0.79 N). The highest friction was observed with ceramic brackets and beta-titanium wires (4.12 +/- 0.39 N), while the lowest was recorded with self-ligating brackets and stainless steel wires (0.98 +/- 0.18 N). Conclusion: Frictional resistance was significantly influenced by both bracket system and archwire material. Passive self-ligating brackets combined with stainless steel archwires offered the most favourable low-friction combination, whereas ceramic brackets with beta-titanium archwires generated the highest resistance.
Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science Vol. 25. Supplementary Issue-2 (2026), Page : S276-S282
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Title: Comparative Evaluation of Frictional Resistance Between Conventional, Self-Ligating, and Ceramic Brackets Using Different Archwire Materials: An In Vitro Study
Description:
Background Frictional resistance at the bracket-archwire interface is a critical determinant of force delivery during sliding mechanics.
Bracket design, slot material, ligation method, and archwire alloy may modify static and kinetic friction, thereby influencing clinical efficiency during alignment and space closure.
Methods This in vitro experimental study compared frictional resistance among three 0.
022-inch slot bracket systems: conventional stainless steel brackets with elastomeric ligation, passive selfligating stainless steel brackets, and polycrystalline ceramic brackets with elastomeric ligation.
Three archwire materials were tested: 0.
019 x 0.
025-inch stainless steel, nickel-titanium, and beta-titanium.
Ninety bracket-archwire assemblies were prepared, with 10 specimens per bracket-wire combination.
Testing was performed using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 5 mm/min under artificial saliva lubrication at 37 degrees C.
Static frictional resistance and kinetic frictional resistance were recorded in Newtons.
Data were analysed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests.
Results Mean static friction differed significantly by bracket type and wire material (p<0.
001).
Self-ligating brackets showed the lowest overall static friction (1.
42 +/- 0.
32 N), followed by conventional stainless steel brackets (2.
37 +/- 0.
46 N), whereas ceramic brackets showed the highest values (3.
29 +/- 0.
58 N).
Stainless steel archwires produced the lowest mean static friction (1.
67 +/- 0.
48 N), nickel-titanium produced intermediate values (2.
33 +/- 0.
67 N), and beta-titanium produced the highest values (3.
08 +/- 0.
79 N).
The highest friction was observed with ceramic brackets and beta-titanium wires (4.
12 +/- 0.
39 N), while the lowest was recorded with self-ligating brackets and stainless steel wires (0.
98 +/- 0.
18 N).
Conclusion: Frictional resistance was significantly influenced by both bracket system and archwire material.
Passive self-ligating brackets combined with stainless steel archwires offered the most favourable low-friction combination, whereas ceramic brackets with beta-titanium archwires generated the highest resistance.
Bangladesh Journal of Medical Science Vol.
25.
Supplementary Issue-2 (2026), Page : S276-S282.
Related Results
Evaluation of the frictional resistance between different bracket types, archwires and ligation materials: An in-vitro study
Evaluation of the frictional resistance between different bracket types, archwires and ligation materials: An in-vitro study
In orthodontic treatment, brackets need to slide along the archwire to allow for alignment of the teeth. The lesser the friction between the bracket and the archwire, the easier it...
Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets
Comparison of active self-ligating brackets and conventional pre-adjusted brackets
Abstract
Background
Active self-ligating brackets may be more efficient than conventional pre-adjusted brackets.
...
Static frictional resistances of polycrystalline ceramic brackets with conventional slots, glazed slots and metal slot inserts
Static frictional resistances of polycrystalline ceramic brackets with conventional slots, glazed slots and metal slot inserts
Abstract
Aims
To compare the static frictional resistance of ceramic brackets with a conventional slot (Allure), a glazed...
A Comparative Evaluation of Frictional Resistance of Conventional, Teflon and Epoxy Coated Stainless Steel Archwires in Metal, Ceramic Brackets – An In vitro Study
A Comparative Evaluation of Frictional Resistance of Conventional, Teflon and Epoxy Coated Stainless Steel Archwires in Metal, Ceramic Brackets – An In vitro Study
Aim and Objectives: To evaluate the frictional resistance of Conventional, Teflon, and Epoxy coated stainless steel archwires in Metal, Ceramic brackets.
Materials and Method...
Porcelain brackets during initial alignment: are self-ligating cosmetic brackets more efficient?
Porcelain brackets during initial alignment: are self-ligating cosmetic brackets more efficient?
Abstract
Objective
To compare the effectiveness of a self-ligating (SL) porcelain bracket with a conventional porcelain (...
Comparing the rotational control during canine retraction using two different bracket systems – Synergy and Self Ligating brackets – Split mouth study
Comparing the rotational control during canine retraction using two different bracket systems – Synergy and Self Ligating brackets – Split mouth study
Canine, being the cornerstone of the dental arches, shares an important role in oral functions, esthetics, arch shape and stability. With the new bracket systems that have come to ...
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
Primerjalna književnost na prelomu tisočletja
In a comprehensive and at times critical manner, this volume seeks to shed light on the development of events in Western (i.e., European and North American) comparative literature ...
Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets
Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets
Abstract
Objective:
To compare the rates of retraction down an archwire of maxillary canine teeth when bracketed with a self-ligating bracket was used ...

