Student Theses, Dissertations and Capstones
Document Type
Thesis - NSU Access Only
Degree Name
Master of Science (M.S.) in Dentistry
Copyright Statement
All rights reserved. This publication is intended for use solely by faculty, students, and staff of Nova Southeastern University. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, now known or later developed, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author or the publisher.
Department
College of Dental Medicine
First Advisor
Chin-Yu Lin
Date of original Performance / Presentation
January 2022
Publication Date / Copyright Date
1-1-2022
NSUWorks Citation
Kenton Craig Covington. 2022. Salivary Mucin and Its Effect on the Resistance to Sliding. Master's thesis. Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved from NSUWorks, College of Dental Medicine. (157)
https://nsuworks.nova.edu/hpd_cdm_stuetd/157.
Abstract
Introduction: Resistance to sliding is defined as the forces which are resistant to motion when a wire slides through brackets. Many studies have examined the relationship of brackets and types of arch wires to determine the resistance of sliding. For orthodontic couples, the efficiency of delivering an applied force is 40-88% due to the loss to resistance to sliding. Therefore, resistance to sliding is an important parameter in the biomechanical design of orthodontic appliances for optimal orthodontic tooth movements. Mucins are a family of proteins which are secreted by cells to lubricate surfaces. It is not clear whether salivary mucins and gastric mucins have the same effect on the resistance to sliding. Currently, there is not a study that addresses the effect of salivary mucins on the resistance to sliding. Orthodontic biomechanics are designed to use appropriate forces to produce tooth movements. However, intended forces can be altered by the resistance to sliding (RS). The RS can be affected by wires, bracket materials, bracket systems, or oral vi environments. Since salivary mucins are lubricating proteins in the oral environment, this study will examine the role of salivary mucins on the resistance to sliding. Methods: The resistance to sliding will be measured by using 5 cm samples of 0.019 x 0.025-inch rectangular SS wires and sliding these straight wire segments through a three- bracket system mounted on the universal testing machine (Instron 8841; Instron, Norwood, USA). The samples will be divided up stratified into four groups according to the concentrations of Submaxillary Bovine Mucin (3.5g% and 23.3 mg%) in MG1 concentrations in stimulated human saliva (23.3 ± 14.6 mg%) and gastric mucin (3.5 g%, positive control), and then further divided based upon the active or passive configuration of the brackets. A custom bracket-wire-holder apparatus will house three edgewise brackets. The passive configuration will require the middle bracket to be at an angle of 0 degrees and the active configuration will contain a middle bracket angled at 3 degrees. The wire will be pulled with a crosshead velocity of 5 mm/min for 5 mm and a load cell of 1000 N by the Instron 8841. Descriptive statistics will be used for both the recorded average resistance to sliding (ARS) and the maximum resistance to sliding (MRS). A two-way ANOVA will be used to assess the relationship between concentrations of Submaxillary Bovine Mucin in the active and passive configuration. There will be 10 samples in each group (total 80 samples in 8 groups) according to a priori power analysis (f=0.4, alpha=0.05, power=0.8, df=7, number of groups=8) by G*Power 3.1. Results: The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) demonstrated that Gastric Porcine Mucin, Submaxillary Bovine Mucin, and artificial saliva without mucin did not have a significant effect on the resistance to sliding at the p<0.05 level when compared against one another. However, the active configuration did indicate a significant increase in the resistance to vii sliding when compared to the passive configuration(p<0.0001). We also found a significant decrease in the resistance to sliding with water compared to dry conditions in passive MRS and ARS (p<0.003 and p<0.041). The dry condition had a significant increase in the resistance to sliding in the active ARS when compared to both the positive and negative control (p<0.013 and p<0.003). Conclusion: There was no significant difference of the resistance to sliding between Gastric Porcine Mucin and Submaxillary Bovine Mucin. The dry condition had an increase in the resistance to sliding in the ARS in the active configuration compared to both types of mucin. The clinically relevant MRS in the active configuration did not indicate a change in the resistance to sliding for Submaxillary Bovine or Gastric Porcine Mucin.
Disciplines
Dentistry
Files
Download Full Text (2.3 MB)