Abstract
Aim
To compare the efficiency of orthodontic archwire sequences produced by three manufacturers.
Design
Prospective, randomized clinical trial with three parallel groups.
Setting
Private orthodontic practice in Caloundra, QLD, Australia
Subjects and methods
One hundred and thirty‐two consecutive patients were randomized to one of three archwire sequence groups: (i) 3M Unitek, 0·014 inch Nitinol, 0·017 inch×0·017 inch heat activated Ni–Ti; (ii) GAC international, 0·014 inch Sentalloy, 0·016×0·022 inch Bioforce; and (iii) Ormco corporation, 0·014 inch Damon Copper Ni–Ti, 0·014×0·025 inch Damon Copper Ni–Ti. All patients received 0·018×0·025 inch slot Victory SeriesTM brackets.
Outcome measures
Mandibular impressions were taken before the insertion of each archwire. Patients completed discomfort surveys according to a seven‐point Likert Scale at 4 h, 24 h, 3 days and 7 days after the insertion of each archwire. Efficiency was measured by time required to reach the working archwire, mandibular anterior alignment and level of discomfort.
Results
No significant differences were found in the reduction of irregularity between the archwire sequences at any time‐point (T1:
Conclusions
The archwire sequences were similar in alignment efficiency and overall discomfort. Progression in archwire dimension and archform may contribute to discomfort levels. This study provides clinical justification for three common archwire sequences in 0·018×0·025 inch slot brackets.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
