OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of wire dimension and wire length on the splint rigidity of wire-composite splints in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A custom-made artificial model was used. The central incisors simulated 'injured' teeth with increased mobility, and the lateral incisors and canines served as 'uninjured' teeth with physiological mobility. To assess horizontal and vertical tooth mobility before and after splinting, the Periotest and Zwick methods were applied. Teeth 13-23 were splinted using wire-composite splint 1 (WCS1; Dentaflex 0.45 mm) and wire-composite splint 2 (WCS2; Strengtheners 0.8 × 1.8 mm). Splint length was varied by successively shortening the wire. The influence of wire dimension was tested using t-test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test with the Bonferroni-Holm procedure (α = 0.05). To test the influence of wire length, anova and Kruskal-Wallis tests as well as Tukey range and Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni-Holm procedure were applied (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Wire dimension significantly influenced splint rigidity (P < 0.05). The wire length significantly influenced the splint rigidity of WCS1 in the horizontal dimension and WCS2 in the horizontal and vertical dimensions (P < 0.05). Splint rigidity was significantly reduced when splinting only 'injured' teeth compared with splints including 'uninjured' adjacent teeth (P < 0.05). No differences were found between splints including one or two 'uninjured' teeth on each side (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: WCS1 is flexible compared with the more rigid WCS2. The wire length influences the rigidity. To ensure adequate fixation and reduce the risk of enamel damage during splint removal, the splint should include only one 'uninjured' tooth bilaterally.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of wire dimension and wire length on the splint rigidity of wire-composite splints in vitro. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A custom-made artificial model was used. The central incisors simulated 'injured' teeth with increased mobility, and the lateral incisors and canines served as 'uninjured' teeth with physiological mobility. To assess horizontal and vertical tooth mobility before and after splinting, the Periotest and Zwick methods were applied. Teeth 13-23 were splinted using wire-composite splint 1 (WCS1; Dentaflex 0.45 mm) and wire-composite splint 2 (WCS2; Strengtheners 0.8 × 1.8 mm). Splint length was varied by successively shortening the wire. The influence of wire dimension was tested using t-test and Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test with the Bonferroni-Holm procedure (α = 0.05). To test the influence of wire length, anova and Kruskal-Wallis tests as well as Tukey range and Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni-Holm procedure were applied (α = 0.05). RESULTS: Wire dimension significantly influenced splint rigidity (P < 0.05). The wire length significantly influenced the splint rigidity of WCS1 in the horizontal dimension and WCS2 in the horizontal and vertical dimensions (P < 0.05). Splint rigidity was significantly reduced when splinting only 'injured' teeth compared with splints including 'uninjured' adjacent teeth (P < 0.05). No differences were found between splints including one or two 'uninjured' teeth on each side (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: WCS1 is flexible compared with the more rigid WCS2. The wire length influences the rigidity. To ensure adequate fixation and reduce the risk of enamel damage during splint removal, the splint should include only one 'uninjured' tooth bilaterally.