Premium
Difference in pressure‐formed mouthguard thickness according to the laminate procedure
Author(s) -
Mizuhashi Fumi,
Koide Kaoru
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
dental traumatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.82
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1600-9657
pISSN - 1600-4469
DOI - 10.1111/edt.12516
Subject(s) - mouthguard , molar , materials science , composite material , incisor , dentistry , layer (electronics) , orthodontics , medicine
Aim Mouthguard thickness influences the preventive effects against dental and oral injury. The aim of this study was to examine the difference in pressure‐formed mouthguard thickness according to the laminate procedure used. Materials and methods The materials used were mouthguard sheets of 2.0‐mm and 3.0‐mm ethylene vinyl acetate, and pressure formed using a pressure former. Two forming conditions for laminated mouthguards were examined: the condition 23P used the 2.0‐mm sheet as the first layer and 3.0‐mm sheet as the second layer. The condition 32P used the 3.0‐mm sheet as the first layer and 2.0‐mm sheet as the second layer. The first layer was trimmed to cover only the anterior region; then, the second layer was formed over the first layer. Mouthguard thickness was measured at the labial surface of the central incisor, buccal surface of the first molar, and occlusal surface of the first molar. Statistical analysis was performed by two‐way analysis of variance and Bonferroni method to analyze the differences in thickness by measurement region of mouthguards and forming conditions. Results Mouthguard thickness differed in different regions of the central incisors and the first molars ( P < .01). The thickness at the labial surface of the central incisor became statistically significantly larger on the 32P condition than that on the 23P condition ( P < .01). The thickness at the buccal surface and the occlusal surface of the first molar became statistically significantly larger on the 23P condition than that on the 32P condition ( P < .01). Conclusions The thicknesses of the labial surface of the central incisor became larger when the sheet thickness of the first layer was larger.