Citation

Oikarinen KS, Salonen MA, Korhonen J. Endod. Dent. Traumatol. 1993; 9(3): 115-119.

Affiliation

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University of Oulu, Finland.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1993, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

8243343

Abstract

The guarding capacity of seven mouth protectors (Erkoflex 3.0 and 4.0, Erkoloc 3.0, 4.5 and 5.5, TranSheet/Perform and TranSheet/LiteLine) was tested mechanically on 20 plaster models, two or three tests on each mouth protector. Two tests on a plaster model without the protector served as control. An appliance was constructed to simulate the impact of an ice-hockey puck on the teeth, the plaster model was fixed onto the device and the minimum force needed to break the plaster teeth under the protector was recorded. The average total thickness and that of the soft and hard layers of the labial plates of each mouth protector were recorded along with the average thickness of the cervical and incisal hard and soft layers. The results showed that the best protection was achieved with the TranSheet/LiteLine model, followed by TranSheet/Perform and Erkoloc 5.5 and 4.5 mouthgards. All these had a resilient layer against the teeth, and it was shown in stepwise regression analysis that the only property having a statistically significant effect on the guarding capacity was the thickness of this cervical soft layer.

Language: en