AIM: To evaluate the influence of reinforcement material on in vitro dental splint rigidity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A custom-made artificial model was used. The central incisors simulated 'injured' teeth with increased mobility, and the lateral incisors served as 'uninjured' teeth with physiologic mobility. The Periotest and Zwick methods were used to assess horizontal and vertical tooth mobility before and after splinting, and relative splint effect (SpErel) was calculated. Teeth 12-22 were splinted using two wire-composite splints (WCS), WCS1 (Dentaflex 0.45mm), and WCS2 (Strengtheners 0.8×1.8mm) as well as four quartz-fiber splints, QS1 (Quartz Splint UD 1.5mm), QS2 (Quartz Splint Rope 1.5mm), QS3 (Quartz Splint Woven 2.5mm), and QS4 (dry fibers 667 tex). The influence of the splint type was evaluated using anova, Tukey range, and the Dunnett-T3 test (α=0.05). To test the influence of initial tooth mobility, the t-test was applied (α=0.05). RESULTS: Reinforcement materials significantly influenced splint rigidity (P<0.05). The horizontal and vertical SpErel of WCS1 compared with WCS2 and QFSs1-4 was statistically significant (P<0.05). Significant differences were found when comparing the horizontal SpErel of WCS2 with WCS1 and QSs1-4 (P<0.05). SpErels of the 'injured' and 'uninjured' teeth showed significant differences (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: WCS1 is flexible compared with the more rigid WCS2 and QSs1-4. Initial tooth mobility influences SpErel. The flexible WCS1 can be recommended for splinting dislocation injuries whereas the semi-rigid/rigid WCS2 and QS1-4 can be used for horizontal root fractures and alveolar process fractures. The QS1-4 provide good esthetic outcome.
AIM: To evaluate the influence of reinforcement material on in vitro dental splint rigidity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A custom-made artificial model was used. The central incisors simulated 'injured' teeth with increased mobility, and the lateral incisors served as 'uninjured' teeth with physiologic mobility. The Periotest and Zwick methods were used to assess horizontal and vertical tooth mobility before and after splinting, and relative splint effect (SpErel) was calculated. Teeth 12-22 were splinted using two wire-composite splints (WCS), WCS1 (Dentaflex 0.45mm), and WCS2 (Strengtheners 0.8×1.8mm) as well as four quartz-fiber splints, QS1 (Quartz Splint UD 1.5mm), QS2 (Quartz Splint Rope 1.5mm), QS3 (Quartz Splint Woven 2.5mm), and QS4 (dry fibers 667 tex). The influence of the splint type was evaluated using anova, Tukey range, and the Dunnett-T3 test (α=0.05). To test the influence of initial tooth mobility, the t-test was applied (α=0.05). RESULTS: Reinforcement materials significantly influenced splint rigidity (P<0.05). The horizontal and vertical SpErel of WCS1 compared with WCS2 and QFSs1-4 was statistically significant (P<0.05). Significant differences were found when comparing the horizontal SpErel of WCS2 with WCS1 and QSs1-4 (P<0.05). SpErels of the 'injured' and 'uninjured' teeth showed significant differences (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: WCS1 is flexible compared with the more rigid WCS2 and QSs1-4. Initial tooth mobility influences SpErel. The flexible WCS1 can be recommended for splinting dislocation injuries whereas the semi-rigid/rigid WCS2 and QS1-4 can be used for horizontal root fractures and alveolar process fractures. The QS1-4 provide good esthetic outcome.