ArticleJournal of orthodontic science2024
Assessment the thermoforming effect on the physical and mechanical properties of different thermoplastic orthodontic retainers: An
Article in Journal of orthodontic science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Preheating, Resin-Based Composite, and Wire Types of Orthodontic Lingual Fixed Retainers on the Load at Failure: A Comparative In-Vitro Study.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Article
- Effects of carbonated drinks, alcoholic drinks and mouthwashes with varying pH on mechanical properties and colour stability of various thermoplastic retainers, aligners and occlusal splints: an in-vitro study.Dental press journal of orthodontics · 2026Article
- Impact of simulated gastric acid on the physical and mechanical properties of vacuum-formed retainers: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAs patients are instructed to wear thermoplastic retainers for the rest of their lives, the durability of the materials is a critical factor in evaluating whether the expense is justified. This study examined the physical and mechanical properties of three different thermoplastic retainer materials before and after thermoforming (BT and AT). MATERIALS AND
methodsClear Advantage Series I, Clear Advantage Series II, and Leone types were used, with each material having a thickness of 1 mm. The materials' tensile force, hardness, and water absorption tests have been measured for 90 thermoformed and 90 non-thermoformed specimens (30 specimens from each material).
resultsThe tensile force, hardness, and water absorption values of all the materials differed significantly (
conclusionThermoforming increases the material's water absorption while decreasing its stiffness, affecting its mechanical and physical properties. Clear Advantage Series II (PP) stood out with superior flexibility, wear resistance, and minimal water absorption compared to other materials, highlighting its durability and superiority.
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.