PURPOSE: To validate whether the data for individual patients are correctly reproduced in sagittal condylar path inclination of the articulator, the data obtained by the conventional anterior check bite method and the data obtained by a jaw-tracking system with six degrees of freedom were compared. METHODS: In 5 subjects (4 males and 1 female) with healthy tooth alignments, 5 anterior check bites were obtained from each subject. Sagittal condylar path inclination was measured using seven types of semi-adjustable articulator. Next, the anterior gliding movement was measured 5 times in all 5 subjects using a jaw-tracking system with six degrees of freedom (MMJI- E, Shofu Inc. Kyoto, Japan. The sagittal condylar path inclination data obtained with semi-adjustable articulators were compared to those obtained by the jaw-tracking system using the two-way analysis of variance and Fisher's PLSD method (alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: In measurements of the same subjects for five types of articulators with the check bite method, significant differences were observed by two-way analysis of variance, and differences in measurements among articulators were found (p < 0.01). Regarding the sagittal condylar path inclinations measured with Hanau-184 Wide-View and Dentatus ARL articulators, significant differences were observed on both right and left sides compared with the jaw-tracking system. With the Denar Centri-Check System and Denar Mark II, significant differences were observed on one side (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Denar Cadiax Compact, Hanau Condyle Repositioner, and Hanau H2O are recommended for more accurate measurements of the sagittal condylar path inclination.
PURPOSE: To validate whether the data for individual patients are correctly reproduced in sagittal condylar path inclination of the articulator, the data obtained by the conventional anterior check bite method and the data obtained by a jaw-tracking system with six degrees of freedom were compared. METHODS: In 5 subjects (4 males and 1 female) with healthy tooth alignments, 5 anterior check bites were obtained from each subject. Sagittal condylar path inclination was measured using seven types of semi-adjustable articulator. Next, the anterior gliding movement was measured 5 times in all 5 subjects using a jaw-tracking system with six degrees of freedom (MMJI- E, Shofu Inc. Kyoto, Japan. The sagittal condylar path inclination data obtained with semi-adjustable articulators were compared to those obtained by the jaw-tracking system using the two-way analysis of variance and Fisher's PLSD method (alpha = 0.05). RESULTS: In measurements of the same subjects for five types of articulators with the check bite method, significant differences were observed by two-way analysis of variance, and differences in measurements among articulators were found (p < 0.01). Regarding the sagittal condylar path inclinations measured with Hanau-184 Wide-View and Dentatus ARL articulators, significant differences were observed on both right and left sides compared with the jaw-tracking system. With the Denar Centri-Check System and Denar Mark II, significant differences were observed on one side (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Denar Cadiax Compact, Hanau Condyle Repositioner, and Hanau H2O are recommended for more accurate measurements of the sagittal condylar path inclination.