Orthodontic Force Magnitude for Dental Alignment

Overseen By Georgiana Defilio

Age: < 18

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: UConn Health

Must not be taking: Bisphosphonates, Oral contraceptives, PTH

Disqualifiers: Poor oral hygiene, Root resorption, Chronic illness, others

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: 6

Duration: 17 weeks

40 Participants Needed

What You Need to Know Before You Apply

What is the purpose of this trial?

This trial explores how different force levels, light and heavy, affect the movement of canine teeth during orthodontic treatment. The aim is to determine if the pressure applied by orthodontic devices influences the speed at which these teeth move into place. Participants will receive treatment on one side of their upper canines with a light force and the other side with a heavy force to compare results. Ideal candidates are healthy, non-smoking individuals aged 11-16 who have had certain teeth extracted and need their upper canines moved as part of their orthodontic treatment plan. As an unphased trial, this study offers participants the opportunity to contribute to valuable research that could enhance orthodontic treatments for future patients.

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial excludes patients on medications that may alter bone metabolism, such as bisphosphonates, oral contraceptives, or parathyroid hormone. If you are taking these medications, you may not be eligible to participate.

What prior data suggests that these orthodontic force levels are safe for dental alignment?

Research has shown that using different levels of force in orthodontic treatments is generally safe. Earlier studies have not found any serious harm from treatments using heavier force. Specifically, using 150 grams of force has been linked to faster tooth movement and increased biological activity without causing damage. Although there is no direct evidence for the exact force used in this trial, higher forces might slightly increase the risk of root resorption, which is the wearing away of the tooth root, but this is usually mild.

For treatments using lighter force, research indicates that lower forces are well-tolerated and can even help teeth move faster when combined with techniques like low-level light therapy. Overall, both heavy and light force treatments are considered safe based on past studies. Participants should expect some discomfort, as this is common in orthodontic procedures. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

Why are researchers excited about this trial?

Researchers are excited about this orthodontic trial because it explores the effects of different force magnitudes—heavy (400g) and light (150g)—in moving teeth. Traditionally, orthodontic treatments involve applying a standard force to adjust teeth positions, but this trial is examining whether varying the force can enhance the speed and effectiveness of dental alignment. By using NiTi coil springs calibrated for specific force strengths, this study could reveal more efficient techniques for straightening teeth, potentially reducing treatment time and improving patient comfort. Understanding the optimal force could lead to more personalized and precise orthodontic care.

What evidence suggests that this trial's force levels could be effective for dental alignment?

This trial will compare the effects of different orthodontic force magnitudes on dental alignment. Participants in one arm will receive a light force of 150 grams, which studies have suggested can move teeth faster and increase biological activity without harm. Another arm will apply a heavy force of 400 grams, typically used when teeth are crowded or need movement after extractions. The aim is to apply sufficient pressure to move teeth efficiently without causing damage. Both pressure levels are effective, but the optimal pressure may vary for each individual. ^{2 6 7 8 9}

Who Is on the Research Team?

Flavio Uribe, DDS

Principal Investigator

UConn Health

Are You a Good Fit for This Trial?

This trial is for individuals with crossbite or tooth crowding who need orthodontic treatment to move their canine teeth. Participants should be healthy enough for dental procedures and willing to provide samples of gingival fluid, undergo digital dental scans, and x-rays.

Inclusion Criteria

Healthy patient, non-smoker

The ability to read and understand English and to provide informed consent

I am between 11 and 16 years old.

Exclusion Criteria

Evidence of poor oral hygiene

Evidence of previous root resorption

Medical issues that affect tooth movement

Timeline for a Trial Participant

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Treatment

Participants undergo canine retraction with either light or heavy force using NiTi coil springs. Data collection includes gingival fluid, dental molds, and x-rays.

17 weeks

6 visits (in-person)

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for safety and effectiveness after treatment, including the measurement of external apical root resorption.

4 weeks

What Are the Treatments Tested in This Trial?

Interventions

• Heavy Force
• Light Force

Trial Overview The study is testing the effects of two different levels of force applied by Niti coils during orthodontic treatment: a light force (150g) versus a heavy force (400g). The goal is to see if there's a difference in how quickly canine teeth move with these forces.

How Is the Trial Designed?

Group I: Heavy force (400g NiTi Coil Spring) Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

One side of the maxillary canines to be retracted will have a heavy force assigned randomly. Patients' participation in the study (T0) will be started at the stage of canine retraction. At this appointment, 0.019 x 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire will be placed; power arms will be fabricated from 17x25-inch stainless steel on the maxillary first molars and canines. The height of the power arm will be matched with the center of resistance of both canines and molars based on the root length measured on the periapical radiographs. The archwire will be engaged in the canine bracket using stainless steel ligature wire. NiTi coil spring calibrated for force magnitude (400g) at oral temperature will be used to deliver the assigned force will be engaged from the first molars to the canine power arms.

Group II: Light force (150g Niti Coil Spring) Active Control 1 Intervention

One of the maxillary canines to be retracted will be assigned to the light force group randomly. Patients' participation in the study (T0) will be started at the stage of canine retraction. At this appointment, 0.019 x 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire will be placed; power arms will be fabricated from 17x25-inch stainless steel on the maxillary first molars and canines. The height of the power arm will be matched with the center of resistance of both canines and molars based on the root length measured on the periapical radiographs. The archwire will be engaged in the canine bracket using stainless steel ligature wire. NiTi coil spring calibrated for force magnitude (150g) at oral temperature will be used to deliver the assigned force will be engaged from the first molars to the canine power arms.

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

UConn Health

Lead Sponsor

Trials

218

Recruited

59,100+

Charles Burstone Foundation

Collaborator

Trials

1

Recruited

40+

Published Research Related to This Trial

In a study measuring the forces produced by 10 orthodontic archwires under simulated clinical conditions, the forces exerted at 1.5 mm deflection ranged from 1.5 to 8.3 N when part of a fixed appliance, indicating significant variability in force generation.

When tested as simple beams, the same wires produced much lower forces, ranging from 0.3 to 3.0 N, suggesting that the behavior of orthodontic archwires in clinical settings cannot be accurately predicted using basic physical principles.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Forces exerted by orthodontic aligning archwires. Rock, WP., Wilson, HJ.[2022]

In a study involving 9 patients undergoing bilateral canine retraction, it was found that as the distance between brackets decreased, the retraction force dropped significantly, by 30% for every 1 mm reduction in interbracket distance.

The research highlighted that changes in canine position and angulation during treatment can lead to increased moment-to-force ratios, suggesting that orthodontic plans may need adjustments and that patients should adhere closely to appointment schedules to avoid complications.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Load system of segmental T-loops for canine retraction. Xia, Z., Chen, J., Jiangc, F., et al.[2021]

The drum spring (DS) retractor provides a constant and continuous force of 50 g for canine retraction without the need for reactivation, leading to faster tooth movement compared to the traditional pull coil (PC) retractor, which has a diminishing force.

In a study involving 15 patients, the DS retractor demonstrated more effective canine retraction, particularly in adolescents, suggesting potential for broader clinical applications in orthodontics.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The drum spring (DS) retractor: constant and continuous force for canine retraction. Darendeliler, MA., Darendeliler, H., Uner, O.[2019]

This systematic review analyzed the optimal force magnitude required for effective orthodontic tooth movement using fixed appliances, providing insights into how different force levels can impact treatment outcomes.

The findings suggest that applying the right amount of force is crucial for efficient tooth movement, which can enhance the effectiveness of orthodontic treatments and improve patient comfort.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Forces Between 50 and 100 cN May be Best for Mesiodistal Orthodontic Tooth Movements by Fixed Appliances. Flores-Mir, C.[2021]

The review analyzes the relationship between the force applied by orthodontic appliances and the speed of tooth movement, supporting a specific hypothesis that suggests lower stress on posterior teeth can help maintain anchorage while effectively moving anterior teeth.

The findings indicate that using appliances with low load-deflection rates can optimize tooth movement, providing a strategic approach for orthodontic treatment planning.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

A reassessment of force magnitude in orthodontics. Quinn, RS., Yoshikawa, DK.[2022]

The study identifies multiple factors that influence the ideal forces needed for effective canine retraction in orthodontics, including the type of movement (bodily vs. tipping), the anatomical and biological conditions, and personal factors such as age.

Understanding these factors allows orthodontists to tailor the force applied during treatment, potentially reducing complications and improving outcomes by avoiding unnecessary experimentation.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

[The ideal forces for canine retraction]. Markostamos, K., Akli, K.[2020]

In a study involving 12 female subjects with class II division 1 malocclusion, applying a force of 150 grams during orthodontic treatment resulted in significantly faster tooth movement (2.10 mm) compared to a 100-gram force (1.57 mm).

The higher force of 150 grams also led to increased alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity, indicating enhanced bone remodeling, without causing any root resorption in the maxillary canines.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Crevicular Alkaline Phosphatase Activity and Rate of Tooth Movement of Female Orthodontic Subjects under Different Continuous Force Applications. Megat Abdul Wahab, R., Md Dasor, M., Senafi, S., et al.[2021]

In a study involving 14 patients over 12 weeks, heavy continuous forces (300 g) increased the rate and amount of canine retraction during orthodontic treatment, but also led to greater loss of control over canine rotation and anchorage.

Light continuous forces (50 g) resulted in a greater percentage of canine retraction with less strain on anchorage, suggesting that while heavy forces can speed up movement, they may cause unwanted side effects that could complicate treatment.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Rate of tooth movement under heavy and light continuous orthodontic forces. Yee, JA., Türk, T., Elekdağ-Türk, S., et al.[2022]

Citations

1. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4314834/

Canine retraction: A systematic review of different methods ... Canine retraction is a very important step in treatment of patients with crowding, or first premolar extraction cases. In severe crowding cases until, ...

2. clinicaltrials.gov clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06875037

Study Details | NCT06875037 | Patient-related Outcomes ... A force of 150 grams will be applied to each side, and the force will be checked using a force meter at each appointment (every two weeks) until the canine ...

3. withpower.com withpower.com/trial/phase-malocclusion-9-2024-01746

Orthodontic Force Magnitude for Dental Alignment Research suggests that using a force of 150 grams for canine retraction results in faster tooth movement and increased biological activity without causing harm, ...

4. sciencedirect.com sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0889540609003424

Rate of tooth movement under heavy and light continuous ... The aim of this study was to measure the rate and the amount of orthodontically induced tooth movement under heavy (300 g) and light (50 g) continuous ...

5. bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com bmcoralhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12903-025-05712-0

Effects of canine movement on maxillary anterior en-masse ... This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the amount of canine movement on the responses of incisors and posterior teeth during maxillary anterior en-masse ...

6. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11908732/

An Innovative Approach to Accelerate Maxillary Canine ... The study focuses on an innovative intraoral removable device designed to expedite the retraction of maxillary canines.

7. researchgate.net researchgate.net/publication/281234544_The_Effects_of_Orthodontic_Forces_during_Canine_Retraction_Using_Self-ligating_Brackets_on_Gingival_Crevicular_Fluid_Enzyme_Activity_Canine_Movement_and_Root_Resorption

The Effects of Orthodontic Forces during Canine Retraction ... A force of 100 and 150 g slightly increased the bone modeling process and resulted in similar canine movement and root resorption.

8. mdpi.com mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/17/7619

Analysis of the Forces and Moments in Canine Bodily ... This study aimed to optimize space closure efficiency by comparing the forces and moments exerted by different designs of clear aligners (CAs)

9. journals.sagepub.com journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0301574220963502

Comparison of Rate of Canine Retraction and Secondary ... The objective of the study was to assess the rate of canine retraction and secondary outcomes associated with conventional fixed orthodontic treatment (CFO) ...