Suppr超能文献

咬合板对通过口腔内传感器测量的牙齿机械应力的影响。

The effect of occlusal splints on the mechanical stress on teeth as measured by intraoral sensors.

作者信息

Tanaka Yuto, Yoshida Toru, Ono Yoshiaki, Maeda Yoshinobu

机构信息

Department of Special Care Dentistry, Osaka Dental University Hospital.

Department of Prosthodontics, Gerodontology, and Oral Rehabilitation, Osaka University Graduate School of Dentistry.

出版信息

J Oral Sci. 2020 Dec 23;63(1):41-45. doi: 10.2334/josnusd.20-0030. Epub 2020 Nov 25.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Whether it is possible to prevent mechanical stress on teeth via an occlusal splint remains to be clarified. This study aimed to assess the same by simultaneously recording the occlusal pressure and strain on the teeth in humans.

METHODS

Eleven participants (five women and six men; mean age 25.7 years) were enrolled in this study. Hard and soft oral appliances were fabricated for the maxillary arch of each participant. The strain on the four target teeth (right maxillary and mandibular first premolars, and first molars) and occlusal pressure were concurrently measured, while the participants performed maximum voluntary teeth clenching under each condition (hard, soft, or no occlusal splint).

RESULTS

Compared to the absence of an occlusal splint, hard occlusal splints generated less strain on molar teeth but more strain on premolar teeth, while soft occlusal splints did not lower the strain on all target teeth significantly.

CONCLUSION

Considering the limitations of this study, hard occlusal splints should be used for the protection of molar teeth but for premolar teeth caution is required and depends on the case. On the other hand, soft occlusal splints may not have any benefit for the protection of either type of teeth for patients exhibiting excessive occlusal pressure.

摘要

目的

通过咬合夹板预防牙齿机械应力是否可行仍有待阐明。本研究旨在通过同时记录人类牙齿的咬合压力和应变来评估这一问题。

方法

本研究招募了11名参与者(5名女性和6名男性;平均年龄25.7岁)。为每位参与者的上颌制作了硬质和软质口腔矫治器。在每种情况下(硬质、软质或无咬合夹板),当参与者进行最大自主紧咬牙时,同时测量四颗目标牙(右上颌和下颌第一前磨牙以及第一磨牙)的应变和咬合压力。

结果

与不使用咬合夹板相比,硬质咬合夹板使磨牙的应变较小,但使前磨牙的应变较大,而软质咬合夹板并未显著降低所有目标牙的应变。

结论

考虑到本研究的局限性,硬质咬合夹板应用于保护磨牙,但对于前磨牙则需要谨慎,具体取决于具体情况。另一方面,对于表现出过大咬合压力的患者,软质咬合夹板可能对保护这两种类型的牙齿均无益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验