ArticleEuropean journal of dentistry2025
Evaluation of Mechanical and Elemental Properties of Bioceramic-Coated Orthodontic Brackets and Enamel Surface.
Article in European journal of dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim is to coat orthodontic brackets with two different bioactive materials and to compare the mechanical and morphological properties of coated brackets and tooth surfaces. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 120 stainless steel brackets were divided equally into three groups, that is, the uncoated brackets and nanohydroxyapatite (nHA)-coated, and nanobioactive glass (nBG)-coated brackets using a spin coater machine. The brackets were bonded on the enamel surface and underwent remineralization/demineralization cycles for days 1, 7, 14, and 30. At each time interval, the bond strength of the brackets was assessed using mechanical loading. An optical and scanning electron microscope (SEM) were used for surface evaluation, and the adhesive remanent index (ARI) values were obtained and quantified. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: One-way analysis of variance using Tukey's test was used to compare the differences among the groups.
resultsA uniform distribution of nanoparticles occurred on the surfaces of brackets. The shear bond strength (SBS) showed no significant differences in any tested groups on days 1, 7, and 14. However, control and nBG showed a significant difference from nHA at day 30. On days 7, 14, and 30, the nHA group showed the highest SBS values among the groups. For ARI, most samples showed an adhesive nature of failure at the enamel-brackets interface. The images confirmed the presence of coated particles on brackets and remnants of adhesives after SBS.
conclusionThis study confirmed that the nHA- and nBG-coated brackets have a high potential for application in orthodontics regarding structural and mechanical properties.
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.