Skip to content

Success of two arch wires to relieve irregularity of teeth

A Comparative evaluation of the alignment efficiency of conventional and Copper-Nickel Titanium arch wire in mandibular anterior crowding: A Randomized Control Trial

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2018/10/016038
Enrollment
44
Registered
2018-10-16
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2024-05-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: M263- Anomalies of tooth position of fully erupted tooth or teeth Health Condition 2: M264- Malocclusion, unspecified

Interventions

Intervention1: Conventional Nickel Titanium arch wire: Conventional Nickel Titanium arch wire, Wire sequence (0.014 inch, 0.016 inch and 0.018 inch, 0.019x0.025 to working arch wire of 0.019x0.025 sta

Sponsors

All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. With age group of 12-30 years of age at the start of treatment, 2. Permanent dentition including the maxillary second molars. 3. Arch length deficiency with lower anterior crowding between 3 and 6 mm 4. Patients having no impacted teeth present in the dentition except third molars, 5. Treatment plan including extraction of the mandibular first premolars

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Patient with crowding less than 4 mm 2. Patients with spacing in the lower anterior region. 3. Patients whose treatment plans included extraction of a lower incisor. 4. Patients with a blocked-out tooth that did not allow for placement of the bracket at the initial bonding appointment. 5. Patients with a relevant medical history. 6. Patients with poor oral hygiene or periodontally compromised teeth 7. Any previous history of orthodontic tooth movement 8. Patient with cleft lip and palate or with any other craniofacial anomaly

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
To compare the alignment efficiency of two nickel titanium arch wire during orthodontic treatment in terms of time required to reach the working arch wire.Timepoint: At the start of treatment (T0)-Placement of 0.014 NiTi & 0.014 Cu NiTi 1st month (T1)-Evaluation of 0.014 NiTi & Cu-NiTi & placement of 0.016 NiTi and Cu-NiTi. 2nd month (T2)-Evaluation of 0.016 NiTi & Cu-NiTi & placement of 0.018 NiTi and Cu-NiTi 3rd month (T3)-Evaluation of 0.018 NiTi & Cu-NiTi & placement of 0.019X0.025 NiTi & Cu-NiTi 4th month (T4)-Evaluation of 0.019X0.025 NiTi & Cu-NiTi & placement of 0.019X0.025 Stainless steel for both the groups

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Assessing pain perception during orthodontic treatment in conventional NiTi vs Copper NiTi wires.Timepoint: The questionnaire recorded orthodontic pain after, 4hours, 24hours, and 1 week after each archwire change by means of a 10-mm visual analogue scale (VAS) ;Assessment of root resorption during orthodontic treatement in conventional NiTi vs Copper NiTi wiresTimepoint: Assessed before and after completion of alignment at baseline and at the end of 5th month

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Navleen Kaur Bhatia

All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur

drnavleenbhatia@gmail.com9818387105

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026