In vitro splint rigidity evaluation - comparison of a dynamic and a static measuring method

Abstract

The Periotest and vertical Zwick values are highly reproducible. The measurements of the two methods do not correlate; therefore, a conversion of Periotest values into metric displacement data is not feasible. The two methods provide different valuable information about tooth mobility. The Periotest method describes the damping characteristics of the periodontal ligament while the Zwick method reveals quantitative metric values.

Rigidity evaluation of quartz‐fiber splints compared with wire‐composite splints

“…Previous studies evaluated splint rigidity in vitro using an artificial model (1,13,19). The advantages of artificial models are continuous availability, low to moderate inter-individual variability, and the ability to simulate physiologic and increased tooth mobility.…”

“…Before inserting a splint, the middle part of the vestibular enamel surface of the tooth facets was etched for 15 s (Sealbond II Etching; RTD) and bonded (1,2,13,19). All measurements were consecutively repeated three times per tooth, in the same sequence (tooth 12, 11, 21, 22) ( Fig.…”

“…In addition, the splint should enable the patient to conduct oral hygiene as well as comfortably load the teeth during mastication (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7). Adhesively attached trauma splints consist of various reinforcements such as wires, fiber materials, or fishing line; these splints fulfill most of these treatment-related requirements (3,4,10,(13)(14)(15)(16)(17). Trauma involving the periodontal ligament [PDL], after dislocation injuries, requires flexible splinting to allow the transmission of functional forces and improved outcome (3,5,8,9,11).…”

“…In addition, tooth mobility can be individually adjusted to simulate increased and physiologic mobility (1,13,19). The two most commonly used methods to evaluate splint rigidity in vitro are the dynamic Periotest Ò method (1-4, 10, 13, 14, 17, 19) and a static measuring technique using universal testing machines (13,15,16,19,20,27). The two most commonly used methods to evaluate splint rigidity in vitro are the dynamic Periotest Ò method (1-4, 10, 13, 14, 17, 19) and a static measuring technique using universal testing machines (13,15,16,19,20,27).…”

Use of a laser displacement sensor with a non-contact electromagnetic vibration device for assessment of simulated periodontal tissue conditions

“…Additionally, application of the Periotest is limited by the confined intraoral environment. The manufacturer's instructions for measuring PTVs suggest that the handpiece should be held at the correct angle and position to the target tooth, because the reading from the Periotest is considerably affected by tapping direction and position (7,12,13). However, these recommendations are difficult to implement when assessing posterior teeth (11).…”