English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The aim of this study was to define and compare numbers and types of occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspidation. The study consisted of clinical and photographic analysis of occlusal contacts in maximum intercuspidation. Twenty-six Brazilian subjects were selected before orthodontic treatment, 20 males and 6 females, leucodermas with ages ranging between 12 and 18 years. The subjects were diagnosed and grouped into 13 with Angle Class I malocclusion and 13 with Angle Class II division 1 malocclusion, according to the following criteria: complete permanent dentition erupted from second molar to second molar, without cavities, interproximal wear, extractions or previous orthodontic treatment, healthy periodontal status and absence of temporo-mandibular joint dysfunction. After analysis, the occlusal contacts were classified according to the established criteria as: tripodism, bipodism, monopodism, cuspid to a marginal ridge, cuspid to two marginal ridges, cuspid tip to inclined plane, surface to surface and top to top. The KolmogorovSmirnov Z test was used to determine variables normality and paired t test to compare occlusal contacts statistical differences between the studied malocclusions (p<.05). The results showed that the mean number of occlusal contacts per subject in Class I malocclusion was 43. 38 and 44.38 for Class II division 1 malocclusion, this difference was not statistically significant. The occlusal contacts types and frequency in maximum intercuspidation for Class I malocclusion was: cuspid-fossa (32%) – (3% tripodism, 14% bipodism, 15% monopodism), cuspid to marginal ridge (21%), cuspid to two marginal ridges (14%), cuspid to inclined plane (11%), surface to surface (22%) and top to top (1%). And in Class II division 1: cuspid-fossa (34%) – (4% tripodism, 11% bipodism, 19% monopodism), cuspid to marginal ridge (14%), cuspid to two marginal ridges (13%), cuspid to inclined plane (10%), surface to surface (30%) and top to top (0.4%). There is a variety of factors that influence the number of occlusal contacts. Concluding that there is no occlusal contact type pattern according with the studied malocclusions. A proper selection of occlusal contacts types such as cuspid to fossa or cuspid to marginal ridge and its location in the teeth, should be individually subject defined. The existence of an adequate occlusal contacts, leads to a correct distribution of forces, promoting periodontal health.

Estudo do número de contatos oclusais na posição de máxima intercuspidação, ao início do tratamento ortodôntico em pacientes com maloclusão classe I e classe II divisão 1 de Angle