Advertisement
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Advanced SearchSave search
Original article| Volume 95, ISSUE 5, P388-400, May 01, 1989

Physical and mechanical properties of elastomers in orthodontic positioners

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(89)90300-4
Physical and mechanical properties of elastomers in orthodontic positioners
Previous ArticleFunctional orthopedic magnetic appliance (FOMA) II—Modus operandi
Next ArticleThe effect of the amount of protrusion built into the Bionator on condylar growth and displacement: A clinical study
      This paper is only available as a PDF. To read, Please Download here.

      Abstract

      Elastomers for conventional Kesling-type tooth positioners are relatively inelastic and are primarily indicated as finishing devices. However, new materials, first described in the Japanese literature, with claims of a greater range of tooth movement warrant a comparison with conventional materials. Physical and mechanical property testing of positioner elastomers has not been reported in the orthodontic literature. This investigation compared properties of a high temperature vulcanizing (HTV) Japanese silicone (Orthocon) to three traditional polyurethane and vinyl-based polymers and five experimental silicone elastomers. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy established the definitive chemical composition of the urethane and vinyl materials obtained from a commercial positioner laboratory. Tear strength, tensile strength, tensile stress at selected elongations, and ultimate elongation of all materials were evaluated at 37° C in an aqueous environment. Hardness and water sorption values also were determined and an in vitro force measurement apparatus was fabricated to determine force levels exerted by positioner materials at low displacements. Orthocon was statistically different (Duncan's multiple range test, p < 0.05) from the traditional commercial urethane and vinyl materials. Orthocon had lower tear strength than the traditional materials. It also demonstrated lower stress values below 100% elongation. The parameters of tensile stress at 50% elongation and ultimate elongation were statistically identical for Orthocon and one experimental silicone material.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Register: Create an account
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Kesling H.D.
        The philosophy of the tooth positioning appliance.
        Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1945; 31: 297-304
        • Kesling H.D.
        Coordinating the predetermined pattern and tooth positioner with conventional treatment.
        Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1946; 32: 285-293
        • Elsasser W.A.
        Some observations on the history and use of the Kesling positioner.
        Am J Orthod. 1950; 36: 368-374
        • Vorhies J.M.
        Short intensive use of tooth positioner and an appraisal of the results.
        Angle Orthod. 1960; 30: 248-254
        • Gottlieb E.L.
        Success and failure with the positioner appliance.
        J Pract Orthod. 1968; 11: 506-522
        • Wells N.E.
        Application of the positioner appliance in orthodontic treatment.
        Am J Orthod. 1970; 58: 351-366
        • Nishiyama M.
        • Kamada K.
        • Horiuchi S.
        A new construction of tooth positioners with LTV vinyl silicone rubber.
        J Nihon Univ Sch Dent. 1977; 19: 93-102
        • Yoshii O.
        New orthodontic device—dynamic positioner (D.P.). I. Approach to the proposal of D.P. and transparent silicone rubber.
        Nippon Dent Rev. 1980; 452 (in Japanese): 61-74
        • Yoshii O.
        New orthodontic device—dynamic positioner (D.P.). II. Practical application and construction of D.P.
        Nippon Dent Rev. 1980; 454 (in Japanese): 107-130
        • Yoshii O.
        New orthodontic device—dynamic positioner (D.P.). III. Case reports of reversed occlusion.
        Nippon Dent Rev. 1980; 457 (in Japanese): 146-164
        • Yoshii O.
        New orthodontic device—dynamic positioner (D.P.). III. Case reports of reversed occlusion (Part II).
        Nippon Dent Rev. 1980; 458 (in Japanese): 112-129
        • Kamada K.
        • Tamura T.
        • Hama Y.
        • et al.
        Case reports on tooth positioners using LTV vinyl silicone rubber.
        J Nihon Univ Sch Dent. 1984; 26: 11-29
        • Moore D.J.
        • Glaser Z.R.
        • Tabacco M.J.
        • Linebaugh M.G.
        Evaluation of polymeric materials for maxillofacial prosthetics.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1977; 38: 319-326
        • Bell W.T.
        • Chalian V.A.
        • Moore B.K.
        Polydimethylsiloxane materials in maxillofacial prosthetics: evaluation and comparison of physical properties.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1985; 54: 404-410
        • Craig R.G.
        • Godwin W.D.
        Physical properties of materials for custom-made mouth protectors.
        J Mich Dent Assoc. 1967; 49: 34-40
        • Going R.E.
        • Loehman R.E.
        • Chan M.S.
        Mouthguard materials: their physical and mechanical properties.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 1974; 89: 132-138
        • Bishop B.M.
        • Davies E.H.
        • von Fraunhofer J.A.
        Materials for mouth protectors.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1985; 53: 256-261
      18. Specification No. 12 for denture base polymers. Reports of Councils and Bureaus.
        J Am Dent Assoc. 1975; 90: 42-49
        • Nikolai R.J.
        On optimum orthodontic force theory as applied to canine retraction.
        Am J Orthod. 1975; 68: 290-302
        • Smith R.
        • Storey E.
        The importance of force in orthodontics.
        Aust J Dent. 1952; 56: 291-304
        • Reitan K.
        Some factors determining the evaluation of forces in orthodontics.
        Am J Orthod. 1957; 43: 32-45
        • Lee B.
        Relationship between tooth movement rate and estimated pressure applied.
        J Dent Res. 1965; 44: 1053-1057
        • Ricketts R.M.
        • Bench R.W.
        • Gugino C.F.
        • Hilger J.J.
        • Schulhof R.J.
        Bioprogressive therapy.
        in: Rocky Mountain Orthodontics, Denver1979: 98-99

      Article Info

      Footnotes

      ☆Supported in part by SBIR/NIDR Grant 1R43 DE07387-01A1 to Great Lakes Orthodontics, Ltd.

      ☆This article is based on a thesis by Stephen Warunek submitted to the Orthodontics Department, SUNY at Buffalo School of Dental Medicine, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of master of science.

      Identification

      DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(89)90300-4

      Copyright

      © 1989 Published by Elsevier Inc.

      ScienceDirect

      Access this article on ScienceDirect
      We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. To update your cookie settings, please visit the for this site.
      Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. except certain content provided by third parties. The content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals.


      RELX