These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparison of dynamic and static testing of latex and nonlatex orthodontic elastics.
    Author: Kersey ML, Glover KE, Heo G, Raboud D, Major PW.
    Journal: Angle Orthod; 2003 Apr; 73(2):181-6. PubMed ID: 12725375.
    Abstract:
    The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of repeated stretching (cyclic testing) and static testing on the force decay properties of two different types of orthodontic elastics from a single supplier. Samples of American Orthodontics' 0.25 inch, 4.5 oz (6.35 mm, 127.5 g) latex and nonlatex elastics were used and a sample size of 12 elastics per group was tested. Static testing involved stretching the elastics to three times marketed internal diameter (19.05 mm) and measuring force levels at intervals over 24 hours. Cyclic testing used the same initial extension but cycled the elastics an additional 24.7 mm to simulate extension with maximal opening in the mouth. Both types of elastic had similar initial forces that were statistically below the marketed force (122 and 118 g for latex and nonlatex elastics, respectively) at three times marketed internal diameter. Cyclic testing caused significantly more force loss and this difference occurred primarily within the first 30 minutes. For statically tested elastics the percentage of initial force remaining at 4, 8, and 24 hours was 87%, 85%, 83%, and 83%, 78%, 69% for latex and nonlatex elastics, respectively. For cyclically tested elastics the percentage of initial force remaining at 4, 8, and 24 hours was 77%, 76%, 75%, and 65%, 63%, 53% for latex and nonlatex elastics, respectively.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]