Literature DB >> 9562158

Application of a standard test to the in vitro performance of mouthguards.

A Greasley1, G Imlach, B Karet.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To use a simulated upper jaw made from a rubber arch containing replaceable ceramic teeth and a renewable composite ceramic jawbone to compare the effectiveness of seven custom made mouthguard designs and a "boil and bite" mouthguard.
METHODS: Following an earlier development of a standard impact test using a selection of projectile shapes and energies, the most sensitive conditions were selected. These were then applied to a series of six guards constructed in ethylene vinyl acetate and styrene butadiene. The guards were constructed to reflect possible variations in both design and materials.
RESULTS: Significant differences between the mouthguard performances were observed in response to the impact conditions selected. All the custom made designs gave better performance than the "boil and bite" mouthguard.
CONCLUSIONS: The differences observed indicated that the standard test should be sensitive enough to be used as an assessment procedure for the approval of the manufacture of these safety devices. A sequence of tests on eight identical mouthguards selected from a batch of 12, based on the best design, gave remarkably consistent results, indicating that both the manufacturing technique and the test method are reliable. The features of the best design should be incorporated into the current "best practice" for the construction of these devices.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9562158      PMCID: PMC1756058          DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.32.1.17

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Sports Med        ISSN: 0306-3674            Impact factor:   13.800


  1 in total

1.  Towards the development of a standard test procedure for mouthguard assessment.

Authors:  A Greasley; B Karet
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 13.800

  1 in total
  6 in total

1.  Transient forces generated by projectiles on variable quality mouthguards monitored by instrumented impact testing.

Authors:  L Warnet; A Greasley
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 13.800

Review 2.  Scale of protection and the various types of sports mouthguard.

Authors:  D G Patrick; R van Noort; M S Found
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 13.800

3.  Should football players wear custom fitted mouthguards? Results from a group randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  C Finch; R Braham; A McIntosh; P McCrory; R Wolfe
Journal:  Inj Prev       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.399

Review 4.  Mouthguards in sport activities : history, physical properties and injury prevention effectiveness.

Authors:  Joseph J Knapik; Stephen W Marshall; Robyn B Lee; Salima S Darakjy; Sarah B Jones; Timothy A Mitchener; Georgia G delaCruz; Bruce H Jones
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 11.136

5.  What are the differences in protective characteristics of orthodontic mouthguards? An in vitro study.

Authors:  Claire Harrington; Gursharan Minhas; Spyridon N Papageorgiou; Martyn T Cobourne
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Wearability and preference of mouthguard during sport in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Aneesh Kalra; Claire Harrington; Gursharan Minhas; Spyridon N Papageorgiou; Martyn T Cobourne
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 3.075

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.