Custom-Fitted EVA Mouthguards

What is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study

Crisnicaw Verissimo, Paulo Victor Moura Costa, Paulo Cesar Freitas Santos-Filho, Daranee Versluis, Antheunis Versluis, Carlos José Soares

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth stresses and strains, shock absorption, and displacement during impact of custom-fitted mouthguards with different thicknesses. Methods: Six bar-shaped specimens of the EVA were made and subjected to tensile test for elastic modulus assessment. Two-dimensional plane-strain models of a human maxillary central incisor, periodontal ligament, bone support, soft tissue, and mouthguard (MTG) were created. The mouthguards were modeled in five different thicknesses (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 mm). One model was created without mouthguard. A nonlinear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object hit the model at 1 m s-1. Strain and stress (von Mises and Critical modified von Mises) distributions were evaluated, and the displacement of the mouthguard with respect to the tooth was calculated. Results: The mean [SD] for the EVA elastic modulus was 18.075 [0.457] MPa. The model without mouthguard showed the highest stress values at the enamel and dentin structures in the tooth crown during the impact. For the MTG models, the location of the stress concentrations changed to the root, regardless of the MTG thickness, but maximum stresses in the enamel and dentin were lower compared with the model without MTG. Increasing the mouthguard thickness did not notably decrease the stress-strain values. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a mouthguard promoted lower stresses and strains in teeth during an impact with a rigid object. There was no substantial difference in peak stresses and strains and in shock absorption among the different mouthguard thicknesses.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)95-102
Number of pages8
JournalDental Traumatology
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2016

Fingerprint

Extravehicular Activity
Tooth
Elastic Modulus
Dentin
Dental Enamel
Shock
Tooth Crown
Periodontal Ligament
Nonlinear Dynamics
Incisor
Bone and Bones

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Oral Surgery

Cite this

Custom-Fitted EVA Mouthguards : What is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study. / Verissimo, Crisnicaw; Costa, Paulo Victor Moura; Santos-Filho, Paulo Cesar Freitas; Versluis, Daranee; Versluis, Antheunis; Soares, Carlos José.

In: Dental Traumatology, Vol. 32, No. 2, 01.04.2016, p. 95-102.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Verissimo, Crisnicaw ; Costa, Paulo Victor Moura ; Santos-Filho, Paulo Cesar Freitas ; Versluis, Daranee ; Versluis, Antheunis ; Soares, Carlos José. / Custom-Fitted EVA Mouthguards : What is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study. In: Dental Traumatology. 2016 ; Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. 95-102.
@article{ae2806bd118946e7a37fbd8b512aaa76,
title = "Custom-Fitted EVA Mouthguards: What is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study",
abstract = "Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth stresses and strains, shock absorption, and displacement during impact of custom-fitted mouthguards with different thicknesses. Methods: Six bar-shaped specimens of the EVA were made and subjected to tensile test for elastic modulus assessment. Two-dimensional plane-strain models of a human maxillary central incisor, periodontal ligament, bone support, soft tissue, and mouthguard (MTG) were created. The mouthguards were modeled in five different thicknesses (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 mm). One model was created without mouthguard. A nonlinear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object hit the model at 1 m s-1. Strain and stress (von Mises and Critical modified von Mises) distributions were evaluated, and the displacement of the mouthguard with respect to the tooth was calculated. Results: The mean [SD] for the EVA elastic modulus was 18.075 [0.457] MPa. The model without mouthguard showed the highest stress values at the enamel and dentin structures in the tooth crown during the impact. For the MTG models, the location of the stress concentrations changed to the root, regardless of the MTG thickness, but maximum stresses in the enamel and dentin were lower compared with the model without MTG. Increasing the mouthguard thickness did not notably decrease the stress-strain values. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a mouthguard promoted lower stresses and strains in teeth during an impact with a rigid object. There was no substantial difference in peak stresses and strains and in shock absorption among the different mouthguard thicknesses.",
author = "Crisnicaw Verissimo and Costa, {Paulo Victor Moura} and Santos-Filho, {Paulo Cesar Freitas} and Daranee Versluis and Antheunis Versluis and Soares, {Carlos Jos{\'e}}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/edt.12210",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "95--102",
journal = "Dental Traumatology",
issn = "1600-4469",
publisher = "Blackwell Munksgaard",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Custom-Fitted EVA Mouthguards

T2 - What is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study

AU - Verissimo, Crisnicaw

AU - Costa, Paulo Victor Moura

AU - Santos-Filho, Paulo Cesar Freitas

AU - Versluis, Daranee

AU - Versluis, Antheunis

AU - Soares, Carlos José

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth stresses and strains, shock absorption, and displacement during impact of custom-fitted mouthguards with different thicknesses. Methods: Six bar-shaped specimens of the EVA were made and subjected to tensile test for elastic modulus assessment. Two-dimensional plane-strain models of a human maxillary central incisor, periodontal ligament, bone support, soft tissue, and mouthguard (MTG) were created. The mouthguards were modeled in five different thicknesses (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 mm). One model was created without mouthguard. A nonlinear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object hit the model at 1 m s-1. Strain and stress (von Mises and Critical modified von Mises) distributions were evaluated, and the displacement of the mouthguard with respect to the tooth was calculated. Results: The mean [SD] for the EVA elastic modulus was 18.075 [0.457] MPa. The model without mouthguard showed the highest stress values at the enamel and dentin structures in the tooth crown during the impact. For the MTG models, the location of the stress concentrations changed to the root, regardless of the MTG thickness, but maximum stresses in the enamel and dentin were lower compared with the model without MTG. Increasing the mouthguard thickness did not notably decrease the stress-strain values. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a mouthguard promoted lower stresses and strains in teeth during an impact with a rigid object. There was no substantial difference in peak stresses and strains and in shock absorption among the different mouthguard thicknesses.

AB - Background/Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the tooth stresses and strains, shock absorption, and displacement during impact of custom-fitted mouthguards with different thicknesses. Methods: Six bar-shaped specimens of the EVA were made and subjected to tensile test for elastic modulus assessment. Two-dimensional plane-strain models of a human maxillary central incisor, periodontal ligament, bone support, soft tissue, and mouthguard (MTG) were created. The mouthguards were modeled in five different thicknesses (2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 mm). One model was created without mouthguard. A nonlinear dynamic impact analysis was performed in which a rigid object hit the model at 1 m s-1. Strain and stress (von Mises and Critical modified von Mises) distributions were evaluated, and the displacement of the mouthguard with respect to the tooth was calculated. Results: The mean [SD] for the EVA elastic modulus was 18.075 [0.457] MPa. The model without mouthguard showed the highest stress values at the enamel and dentin structures in the tooth crown during the impact. For the MTG models, the location of the stress concentrations changed to the root, regardless of the MTG thickness, but maximum stresses in the enamel and dentin were lower compared with the model without MTG. Increasing the mouthguard thickness did not notably decrease the stress-strain values. Conclusion: It was concluded that the use of a mouthguard promoted lower stresses and strains in teeth during an impact with a rigid object. There was no substantial difference in peak stresses and strains and in shock absorption among the different mouthguard thicknesses.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940492078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940492078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/edt.12210

DO - 10.1111/edt.12210

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 95

EP - 102

JO - Dental Traumatology

JF - Dental Traumatology

SN - 1600-4469

IS - 2

ER -