TY - JOUR
T1 - Influence of custom-made and stock mouthguard thickness on biomechanical response to a simulated impact
AU - Tribst, João Paulo Mendes
AU - de Oliveira Dal Piva, Amanda Maria
AU - Borges, Alexandre Luiz Souto
AU - Bottino, Marco Antonio
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
PY - 2018/12
Y1 - 2018/12
N2 - Background/Aims: Mouthguards (MGs) are devices that can reduce the risks of facial trauma. However, the large variety of MG types and thicknesses raises the question of which type is the most effective and beneficial for the athletes. The aim of this study was to evaluate stress distribution in the skull, teeth, and jaws as a consequence of a direct impact. Material and Methods: Using modeling software, a human skull was modeled and a human jaw was created with all teeth inserted into the respective alveolus. The models were divided according to the MG type (custom-made or stock) and thickness (1, 2, and 4 mm). Two models without MG were evaluated with and without teeth contact. The geometries were exported to analysis software and the materials were considered ideal. Fixation occurred at the base of the foramen magnum. The load (500 N) was applied on the canine tooth with a ball. Maximum principal (MPa) and Von-Mises results were obtained. Results: Without any protection, the generated tensile stress was of greater magnitude causing more damage in the absence of teeth contact. The presence of a MG significantly reduced the generated stress in all structures, and the customized/individualized type was more efficient than stock MGs. Conclusions: In extreme situations when it is impossible to use a MG, keeping the teeth in maximum intercuspal position is less harmful. Despite this, the use of any MG is beneficial and assists in dampening the generated stress. The thicker the device, the greater the capacity for decreasing the damage in all structures. The use of individual protectors for each patient is even more beneficial for preventing trauma during at-risk activities of impact.
AB - Background/Aims: Mouthguards (MGs) are devices that can reduce the risks of facial trauma. However, the large variety of MG types and thicknesses raises the question of which type is the most effective and beneficial for the athletes. The aim of this study was to evaluate stress distribution in the skull, teeth, and jaws as a consequence of a direct impact. Material and Methods: Using modeling software, a human skull was modeled and a human jaw was created with all teeth inserted into the respective alveolus. The models were divided according to the MG type (custom-made or stock) and thickness (1, 2, and 4 mm). Two models without MG were evaluated with and without teeth contact. The geometries were exported to analysis software and the materials were considered ideal. Fixation occurred at the base of the foramen magnum. The load (500 N) was applied on the canine tooth with a ball. Maximum principal (MPa) and Von-Mises results were obtained. Results: Without any protection, the generated tensile stress was of greater magnitude causing more damage in the absence of teeth contact. The presence of a MG significantly reduced the generated stress in all structures, and the customized/individualized type was more efficient than stock MGs. Conclusions: In extreme situations when it is impossible to use a MG, keeping the teeth in maximum intercuspal position is less harmful. Despite this, the use of any MG is beneficial and assists in dampening the generated stress. The thicker the device, the greater the capacity for decreasing the damage in all structures. The use of individual protectors for each patient is even more beneficial for preventing trauma during at-risk activities of impact.
KW - craniomandibular complex
KW - dental trauma
KW - finite element analysis
KW - mouthguard
KW - shock absorption
KW - sports dentistry
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053705091&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85053705091&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/edt.12432
DO - 10.1111/edt.12432
M3 - Article
C2 - 30107079
AN - SCOPUS:85053705091
SN - 1600-4469
VL - 34
SP - 429
EP - 437
JO - Dental traumatology
JF - Dental traumatology
IS - 6
ER -