ArticlePolymers2022
Shear Bond Strength and Mode of Failure of Polypropylene Fibers in Orthodontic Flash-Free Adhesive.
Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this research is to evaluate the effects of magnetostrictive and piezoelectric scalers on the shear bond strength (SBS), failure mode of the polypropylene fiber adhesive brackets, and the load of both scaler tips. The adhesive precoated (APC) Flash-Free brackets were placed on the buccal surfaces of sixty maxillary first premolars, which were divided into three equal groups of 20 specimens each, following the control group (no scaling), the magnetostrictive group, and the piezoelectric group. All specimens were measured for SBS value by using a universal testing machine at a crosshead speed of 0.75 mm/minute. The mode of failure was examined under a×10 magnification light microscope digital camera and scores for the adhesive remnant index (ARI) were recorded and measured load between the magnetostrictive and piezoelectric groups. For statistical analysis, ANOVA and multiple comparison, as well as unpaired t-test and chi-square tests, at the 0.05 significance level were used. The results showed that the average SBS value of the control group was greater than that of the magnetostrictive group and the piezoelectric group. However, the SBS was not significantly influenced by ultrasonic instruments (p > 0.05). The ARI score and load showed no significant differences among the groups (p > 0.05). In conclusion, the SBS of the APC Flash-Free bracket wasn’t affected by using ultrasonic instrumentation around the base of the bracket.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.