Advertisement

Orthodontics on autopilot through digital customization and Programmed Non-Sliding Mechanics

  • Hongsheng Tong
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author: Graduate Orthodontic Program, University of Southern California, 925 West 34th Street, Los Angeles, California 90089.
    Affiliations
    Clinical Assistant Professor, Advanced Orthodontic Program, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, California

    Co-Founder and Principal Orthodontic Scientist for InBrace, Irvine, California
    Search for articles by this author
  • Robert J. Lee
    Affiliations
    Clinical Assistant Professor, Division of Orthodontics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California

    Co-Inventor and Senior Clinical Advisor for InBrace, Irvine, California
    Search for articles by this author
  • Andre Weissheimer
    Affiliations
    Clinical Assistant Professor, Advanced Orthodontic Program, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, California

    Senior Medical Scientist for InBrace, Irvine, California
    Search for articles by this author
  • John Pham
    Affiliations
    Co-Founder and Chief Medical Officer for InBrace, Irvine, California
    Search for articles by this author
Published:November 08, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejwf.2022.10.002

      Highlights

      • InBrace moves teeth in all six df through programmed nonsliding mechanics.
      • Digital customization allows for predictable, programmed tooth movement.
      • Through programmed nonsliding mechanics and digital customization, InBrace moves teeth on autopilot.

      ABSTRACT

      Orthodontic tooth movement occurs in six degrees of freedom, which includes opening and closing spaces. Traditionally, opening and closing spaces are achieved with auxiliaries such as power chains or springs because all traditional bracket systems cannot achieve this tooth movement by themselves. The InBrace system has the capability to program tooth movement in all six degrees of freedom, including opening and closing spaces, through digital customization and its use of Programmed Non-Sliding Mechanics.

      Keywords

      Abbreviations:

      PNM (Programmed Non-Sliding Mechanics), DE (Digital Enhancement), IDB (Indirect bonding), FEA (Finite element analysis)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Tong H
        • Kwon D
        • Shi J
        • Sakai N
        • Enciso R
        • Sameshima GT.
        Mesiodistal angulation and faciolingual inclination of each whole tooth in 3-dimensional space in patients with near-normal occlusion.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 141: 604-617
        • Grauer D
        • Proffit WR.
        Accuracy in tooth positioning with a fully customized lingual orthodontic appliance.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140: 433-443
        • McLaughlin RP
        • Bennett JC.
        Evolution of treatment mechanics and contemporary appliance design in orthodontics: a 40-year perspective.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 147: 654-662
        • Vaden JL.
        A century of the edgewise appliance.
        APOS Trends Orthod. 2015; 5: 239
        • Andrews LF.
        Straight wire: the concept and appliance.
        K-W Publications, San Diego1989
        • Alford TJ
        • Roberts WE
        • Hartsfield JK
        • Eckert GJ
        • Snyder RJ.
        Clinical outcomes for patients finished with the SureSmileTM method compared with conventional fixed orthodontic therapy.
        Angle Orthod. 2011; 81: 383-388
        • Saxe AK
        • Louie LJ
        • Mah J.
        Efficiency and effectiveness of SureSmile.
        World J Orthod. 2010; 11: 16-22
        • Zheng M
        • Liu R
        • Ni Z
        • Yu Z.
        Efficiency, effectiveness and treatment stability of clear aligners: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Orthod Craniofac Res. 2017; 20: 127-133
        • Chambers DW
        • Zitterkopf JG.
        How people make decisions about whether or not to seek orthodontic care: upstream in the treatment chain.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019; 155: 826-831
        • Tong H
        • Weissheimer A
        • Pham J
        • Lee R
        • Redmond WR.
        Lingual orthodontics redefined with automation and friction-free mechanics.
        J Clin Orthod. 2019; 53: 214-224
        • Knop L
        • Gandini LG
        • Shintcovsk RL
        • Gandini MR.
        Scientific use of the finite element method in Orthodontics.
        Dental Press J Orthod. 2015; 20: 119-125
        • Lee RJ
        • Pham J
        • Weissheimer A
        • Tong H.
        Generating an ideal virtual setup with three-dimensional crowns and roots.
        J Clin Orthod. 2015; 49: 696-700
        • Lee RJ
        • Pham J
        • Choy M
        • et al.
        Monitoring of typodont root movement via crown superimposition of single cone-beam computed tomography and consecutive intraoral and consecutive scans.
        Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014; 145: 399-409
        • Lee RJ
        • Weissheimer A
        • Pham J
        • et al.
        Three-dimensional monitoring of root movement during orthodontic treatment.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015; 147: 132-142
        • Lee RJ
        • Pi S
        • Park J
        • et al.
        Accuracy and reliability of the expected root position setup methodology to evaluate root position during orthodontic treatment.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018; 154: 583-595
        • Lee RJ
        • Ko J
        • Park J
        • et al.
        Accuracy and reliability of the expected root position setup on clinical decision making of root position at midtreatment.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019; 156: 566-573
        • Cattaneo PM
        • Cornelis MA.
        Orthodontic tooth movement studied by finite element analysis: an update. What can we learn from these simulations?.
        Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2021; 19: 175-181
        • Aguirre MJ
        • King GJ
        • Waldron JM.
        Assessment of bracket placement and bond strength when comparing direct bonding to indirect bonding techniques.
        Am J Orthod. 1982; 82: 269-276
        • Milne JW
        • Andreasen GF
        • Jakobsen JR.
        Bond strength comparison: a simplified indirect technique versus direct placement of brackets.
        Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989; 96: 8-15
        • El Nigoumi A.
        Assessing the accuracy of indirect bonding with 3D scanning technology.
        J Clin Orthod. 2016; 50: 613-619