The influence of impact object characteristics on impact force and force absorption by mouthguard material.

Most impact force and impact energy absorption tests for mouthguards have used a steel ball in a drop-ball or the pendulum device. However, in reality most sports-related trauma is caused by objects other than the steel ball, e.g. various sized balls, hockey puck, or bat or stick. Also, the elasticity, the velocity and the mass of the object could change the degree and the extent of injuries. In this study, we attempted to measure the impact force from actual sports equipment in order to clarify the exact mechanism of dental-related sports injuries and the protective effects of mouthguards. The present study was conducted using the pendulum impact device and load cell. Impact objects were removable. Seven mobile impact objects were selected for testing: a steel ball, baseball, softball, field hockey ball, ice hockey puck, cricket ball, and wooden baseball bat. The mouthguard material used in this study was a 3-mm-thick Drufosoft (Dreve-Dentamid GmbH, Unna, Germany), and test samples were made of the one-layer type. The peak transmitted forces without mouthguard ranged from the smallest (ice hockey stick, 46.9 kgf) to the biggest (steel ball, 481.6 kgf). The peak transmitted forces were smaller when the mouthguard was attached than without it for all impact materials but the effect was significantly influenced by the object type. The steel ball showed the biggest (62.1%) absorption ability while the wooden bat showed the second biggest (38.3%). The other balls or the puck showed from 0.6 to 6.0% absorbency. These results show that it is important to test the effectiveness of mouthguards on specific types of sports equipment. In future, we may select different materials and mouthguard designs suitable for specific sports.

[1]  Instrumented indentation characterisation of mouth-guard materials. , 2002, Dental materials : official publication of the Academy of Dental Materials.

[2]  I R Matthew,et al.  Forces transmitted through a laminated mouthguard material with a Sorbothane insert. , 1998, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[3]  E H Davies,et al.  Materials for mouth protectors. , 1985, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[4]  A Greasley,et al.  Transient forces generated by projectiles on variable quality mouthguards monitored by instrumented impact testing , 2001, British journal of sports medicine.

[5]  J. B. Park,et al.  Improving mouth guards. , 1994, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[6]  M. Maeda.  Study on Mouth Protectors. Physical Properties of the Polyolefin Polymers. , 1994 .

[7]  J. C. Hickey,et al.  The relation of mouth protectors to cranial pressure and deformation. , 1967, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[8]  M. Waters,et al.  Properties of an experimental mouthguard material. , 2000, The International journal of prosthodontics.

[9]  J A Eccleston,et al.  Beneficial effects of air inclusions on the performance of ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) mouthguard material , 2002, British journal of sports medicine.

[10]  M. Hennequin,et al.  Hardness and shock absorption of silicone rubber for mouth guards. , 1996, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[11]  P. Pfeiffer,et al.  Shock absorption capacities of mouthguards in different types and thicknesses. , 2001, International journal of sports medicine.

[12]  H. Koshino,et al.  Studies on Custom-made Mouthguard Materials. Part 2. Shock Absorptive Characteristics. , 1992 .

[13]  R. G. Craig,et al.  Properties of athletic mouth protectors and materials. , 2002, Journal of oral rehabilitation.

[14]  J. Eccleston,et al.  The effect on energy absorption of hard inserts in laminated EVA mouthguards. , 2000, Australian dental journal.

[15]  J. Hoffmann,et al.  Experimental comparative study of various mouthguards. , 1999, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[16]  M. T. Singer,et al.  Fabrication of a facial shield to prevent facial injuries during sporting events: a clinical report. , 2000, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[17]  L. Messer,et al.  An in vitro study of the efficacy of mouthguard protection for dentoalveolar injuries in deciduous and mixed dentitions. , 1996, Endodontics & dental traumatology.

[18]  R E Going,et al.  Mouthguard materials: their physical and mechanical properties. , 1974, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[19]  J. Eccleston,et al.  EVA mouthguards: how thick should they be? , 2002, Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology.

[20]  Iain R Spears,et al.  The effect of mouthguard design on stresses in the tooth-bone complex. , 2002, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[21]  M Heyns,et al.  Shock absorption potential of different mouth guard materials. , 1999, The Journal of prosthetic dentistry.

[22]  R. G. Craig,et al.  Stess transmitted through mouth protectors. , 1968, The Journal of the American Dental Association (1939).

[23]  K. Oikarinen,et al.  Comparison of the guarding capacities of mouth protectors. , 1993, Endodontics & dental traumatology.