{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Sensory Responses from Dental Implants vs Natural Teeth: An In Vivo Study.","authors":"Rafiullah Bashiri, Allyn Luke, Saul Weiner","doi":"10.11607/jomi.9553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Purpose:</b> To compare subjects' sensory responses to horizontal and vertical forces on tooth- and implant-supported restorations. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> In this prospective study, three protocols simulating the horizontal or vertical forces that occur during mastication were used to obtain subjective responses from subjects. These protocols included the measurement of horizontal force intensity during excursive movements and the identification of initial contact during guided and free vertical closure. Responses were recorded using a 1- to 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) and/ or monitored with electromyography (EMG) and Tekscan. <b>Results:</b> The study included 30 patients with a single implant-supported restoration (ISR) with a contralateral tooth-supported restoration (TSR). For horizontal forces similar to those of mastication (0.6 N), subject VAS scores were similar for both ISRs and TSRs at 6.3 vs 6.1, respectively. At reduced forces (0.2 and 0.4 N), subject responses were greater for the TSR at 3.4 and 5.4, respectively, as opposed to 1.2 and 2.6 for ISR, respectively (<i>P</i> < .01). During vertical guided closure (Test 1) at 25% of maximum bite force (MBF), subjects were more successful at correctly identifying initial contact of TSRs at a rate of 12 out of 17, compared to ISRs, which achieved a rate of 4 out of 13 (<i>P</i> < .1). In vertical free closure (Test 2), subject responses for the correct identification of initial contact at 50% MBF were similar for both TSRs and ISRs at 13 out of 17 and 9 out of 13, respectively. However, comparing the correct responses for subjects whose initial contacts were ISR showed a significant improvement in correct answers from Test 1 to Test 2, from 4 out of 13 correct to 9 out of 13 correct (<i>P</i> < .05). <b>Conclusion:</b> While the mechanism is not clear, subjects' ability to discern the horizontal and vertical forces at levels comparable to mastication appear similar between TSRs and ISRs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50298,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","volume":"38 2","pages":"321-327"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.9553","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To compare subjects' sensory responses to horizontal and vertical forces on tooth- and implant-supported restorations. Materials and Methods: In this prospective study, three protocols simulating the horizontal or vertical forces that occur during mastication were used to obtain subjective responses from subjects. These protocols included the measurement of horizontal force intensity during excursive movements and the identification of initial contact during guided and free vertical closure. Responses were recorded using a 1- to 10-point visual analog scale (VAS) and/ or monitored with electromyography (EMG) and Tekscan. Results: The study included 30 patients with a single implant-supported restoration (ISR) with a contralateral tooth-supported restoration (TSR). For horizontal forces similar to those of mastication (0.6 N), subject VAS scores were similar for both ISRs and TSRs at 6.3 vs 6.1, respectively. At reduced forces (0.2 and 0.4 N), subject responses were greater for the TSR at 3.4 and 5.4, respectively, as opposed to 1.2 and 2.6 for ISR, respectively (P < .01). During vertical guided closure (Test 1) at 25% of maximum bite force (MBF), subjects were more successful at correctly identifying initial contact of TSRs at a rate of 12 out of 17, compared to ISRs, which achieved a rate of 4 out of 13 (P < .1). In vertical free closure (Test 2), subject responses for the correct identification of initial contact at 50% MBF were similar for both TSRs and ISRs at 13 out of 17 and 9 out of 13, respectively. However, comparing the correct responses for subjects whose initial contacts were ISR showed a significant improvement in correct answers from Test 1 to Test 2, from 4 out of 13 correct to 9 out of 13 correct (P < .05). Conclusion: While the mechanism is not clear, subjects' ability to discern the horizontal and vertical forces at levels comparable to mastication appear similar between TSRs and ISRs.
期刊介绍:
Edited by Steven E. Eckert, DDS, MS ISSN (Print): 0882-2786
ISSN (Online): 1942-4434
This highly regarded, often-cited journal integrates clinical and scientific data to improve methods and results of oral and maxillofacial implant therapy. It presents pioneering research, technology, clinical applications, reviews of the literature, seminal studies, emerging technology, position papers, and consensus studies, as well as the many clinical and therapeutic innovations that ensue as a result of these efforts. The editorial board is composed of recognized opinion leaders in their respective areas of expertise and reflects the international reach of the journal. Under their leadership, JOMI maintains its strong scientific integrity while expanding its influence within the field of implant dentistry. JOMI’s popular regular feature "Thematic Abstract Review" presents a review of abstracts of recently published articles on a specific topical area of interest each issue.