Suppr超能文献

两种不同技术对热激活镍钛正畸弓丝转变温度的比较。

Comparison of the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Nickel-Titanium orthodontic archwires by two different techniques.

作者信息

Obaisi Noor Aminah, Galang-Boquiren Maria Therese S, Evans Carla A, Tsay Tzong Guang Peter, Viana Grace, Berzins David, Megremis Spiro

机构信息

University of Illinois at Chicago Department of Orthodontics 801 S. Paulina St. Chicago, IL 60611, United States.

University of Illinois at Chicago Department of Orthodontics 801 S. Paulina St. Chicago, IL 60611, United States.

出版信息

Dent Mater. 2016 Jul;32(7):879-88. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2016.03.017. Epub 2016 May 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of the Bend and Free Recovery (BFR) method as a standard test method to determine the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires. This was done by determining the transformation temperatures of two brands of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires using the both the BFR method and the standard method of Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC). The values obtained from the two methods were compared with each other and to the manufacturer-listed values.

METHODS

Forty heat-activated Ni-Ti archwires from both Rocky Mountain Orthodontics (RMO) and Opal Orthodontics (Opal) were tested using BFR and DSC. Round (0.016 inches) and rectangular (0.019×0.025 inches) archwires from each manufacturer were tested. The austenite start temperatures (As) and austenite finish temperatures (Af) were recorded.

RESULTS

For four of the eight test groups, the BFR method resulted in lower standard deviations than the DSC method, and, overall, the average standard deviation for BFR testing was slightly lower than for DSC testing. Statistically significant differences were seen between the transformation temperatures obtained from the BFR and DSC test methods. However, the Af temperatures obtained from the two methods were remarkably similar with the mean differences ranging from 0.0 to 2.1°C: Af Opal round (BFR 26.7°C, DSC 27.6°C) and rectangular (BFR 27.6°C, DSC 28.6°C); Af RMO round (BFR 25.5°C, DSC 25.5°C) and rectangular (BFR 28.0°C, DSC 25.9°C). Significant differences were observed between the manufacturer-listed transformation temperatures and those obtained with BFR and DSC testing for both manufacturers.

SIGNIFICANCE

The results of this study suggest that the Bend and Free Recovery method is suitable as a standard method to evaluate the transformation temperatures of heat-activated Ni-Ti orthodontic archwires.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在探讨弯曲与自由回复(BFR)方法作为测定热激活镍钛正畸弓丝转变温度的标准测试方法的适用性。通过使用BFR方法和差示扫描量热法(DSC)的标准方法来测定两个品牌的热激活镍钛正畸弓丝的转变温度,完成此项研究。将两种方法获得的值相互比较,并与制造商列出的值进行比较。

方法

使用BFR和DSC对来自落基山正畸(RMO)和蛋白石正畸(Opal)的40根热激活镍钛弓丝进行测试。测试了每个制造商的圆形(0.016英寸)和矩形(0.019×0.025英寸)弓丝。记录奥氏体开始温度(As)和奥氏体结束温度(Af)。

结果

在八个测试组中的四个组中,BFR方法产生的标准差低于DSC方法,总体而言,BFR测试的平均标准差略低于DSC测试。从BFR和DSC测试方法获得的转变温度之间存在统计学上的显著差异。然而,两种方法获得的Af温度非常相似,平均差异范围为0.0至2.1°C:蛋白石圆形(BFR 26.7°C,DSC 27.6°C)和矩形(BFR 27.6°C,DSC 28.6°C);RMO圆形(BFR 25.5°C,DSC 25.5°C)和矩形(BFR 28.0°C,DSC 25.9°C)。对于两个制造商,制造商列出的转变温度与通过BFR和DSC测试获得的转变温度之间均观察到显著差异。

意义

本研究结果表明,弯曲与自由回复方法适合作为评估热激活镍钛正畸弓丝转变温度的标准方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验