Difference in pressure-formed mouthguard thickness according to heating condition.

PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to investigate the differences of pressure-formed mouthguard thickness by varying the heating conditions within the proper heating temperature. MATERIALS AND METHODS The material used in this study was a mouthguard sheet of 3.8-mm ethylene vinyl acetate. The sheets were formed by pressure forming using a vacuum-pressure former. Three heating conditions were varied as follows: the sheet was heated until the center was displaced by 10, 15, and 20 mm from baseline. We measured the mouthguard thickness at the labial surface of the central incisor, buccal surface of the first molar, and occlusal surface of the first molar. Differences in thickness by measurement region of the mouthguards formed under different heating conditions were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and Bonferroni's method. RESULTS We found that mouthguard thickness varied in different regions of the central incisors and the first molars (P < 0.01). The incisal (cusp) region was thinner than the cervical region. There were statistically significant differences among the heating conditions at the labial surface of the central incisor (P < 0.05), and the thickness became larger as the sheet was heated. Mouthguard thickness at the buccal surface and occlusal surface of the first molar did not differ among the three heating conditions. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that the best heating condition of the pressure-forming method was the condition that the sheet was heated until its center displaced by 20 mm. This finding is an important fact when fabricating a mouthguard.

[1]  Mutsumi Takahashi,et al.  Difference in vacuum-formed mouthguard thickness according to heating condition. , 2015, Dental Traumatology.

[2]  M. Kinirons,et al.  Post thermoforming dimensional changes of ethylene vinyl acetate used in custom-made mouthguards for trauma prevention--a pilot study. , 2008, Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology.

[3]  Y. Maeda,et al.  Thermoforming process for fabricating oral appliances: influence of heating and pressure application timing on formability. , 2007, Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists.

[4]  Gianluca Del Rossi,et al.  Fabricating a better mouthguard. Part I: factors influencing mouthguard thinning. , 2007, Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology.

[5]  Howard H Chi.  Properly fitted custom-made mouthguards. , 2007, Compendium of continuing education in dentistry.

[6]  A. Caputo,et al.  Thickness and stiffness characteristics of custom-made mouthguard materials. , 2005, Quintessence international.

[7]  R van Noort,et al.  Scale of protection and the various types of sports mouthguard , 2005, British Journal of Sports Medicine.

[8]  Fumi Takahashi,et al.  Elongation of Mouthguard Sheet after Vacuum Forming Process by Heating Conditions , 2003 .

[9]  D. Low.  Mouthguard protection and sports-related dental trauma. , 2002, Annals of the Royal Australasian College of Dental Surgeons.

[10]  P H Guevara,et al.  A comparison of commercially available mouthguards and a custom mouthguard. , 2001, General dentistry.

[11]  M. M. Choy.  A comparison of custom-made mouthguards. , 1998, Hawaii dental journal.

[12]  J. Eccleston,et al.  Forces transmitted through EVA mouthguard materials of different types and thickness. , 1995, Australian dental journal.

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

[14]  D. Johnsen,et al.  Prevention of intraoral trauma in sports. , 1991, Dental clinics of North America.

[15]  I. Kerr,et al.  Mouth Guards for the Prevention of Injuries in Contact Sports , 1986, Sports medicine.

[16]  J T Wright,et al.  Mouth protectors and oral trauma: a study of adolescent football players. , 1986, Journal of the American Dental Association.