The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 15 , ISSUE 1 ( January-February, 2014 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of Occlusal Contacts among Different Groups of Malocclusion using 3D Digital Models

Naim Z Al-Rayes, Mohammad Y Hajeer

Citation Information : Al-Rayes NZ, Hajeer MY. Evaluation of Occlusal Contacts among Different Groups of Malocclusion using 3D Digital Models. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014; 15 (1):46-55.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-1486

Published Online: 00-02-2014

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2014; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Objectives

(1) To evaluate the applicability of using 3D digital models in the assessment of the magnitude of occlusal contacts by measuring occlusal contact surface areas (OCSAs) and 3D mesh points in ‘contact’ (OCMPs) in a sample of orthodontic patients; (2) To detect any sex differences in the magnitude of occlusal contacts in all malocclusion groups; (3) To detect intergroup differences; (4) To assess possible correlations between occlusal contacts and other dental characteristics.

Materials and methods

Study casts of 120 malocclusion patients were selected and divided into 4 groups (class I division 1, class II division 1, class II division 2, class III) with equal numbers for both sexes. 3D digital models were produced using O3DM™ technology. Occlusal contacts were quantified using two methods of measuring.

Results

(1) No significant sexual differences were detected for OCMPs (mesh points) and OCSAs (mm2) in all groups. (2) There were statistically significant differences among malocclusion groups for OCMPs and OCSAs (p < 0.001). Tukey's HSD posthoc tests showed that class III patients had significantly less occlusal contacts than other malocclusion groups. (3) Stepwise multiple regression equations showed that overjet, lower arch width and overbite could explain approximately 19.5% of the total variance of OCSAs and OCMPs.

Conclusion

Sexual differences in occlusal contacts were not detected. Class I division 1 patients had the highest amount of occlusal contacts among all groups of malocclusion. Overjet, overbite and lower dental arch width were best predictors of occlusal contacts in the current sample.

How to cite this article

Al-Rayes NZ, Hajeer MY. Evaluation of Occlusal Contacts among Different Groups of Malocclusion using 3D Digital Models. J Contemp Dent Pract 2014;15(1):46-55.


PDF Share
  1. Assessment of mastication with implications for oral rehabilitation: a review. J Oral Rehabil 2011;38:754-780.
  2. What dentition assures oral function?. Clin Oral Implants Res 2007;18:34-45.
  3. Masticatory efficiency in individuals with natural dentition. Swed Dent J 1992;16:191-198.
  4. Bite force and occlusal load in healthy young subjects—a methodological study. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 2000;8:11-15.
  5. Determinants of masticatory performance in dentate adults. Arch Oral Biol 2001;46:641-648.
  6. Chewing performance before and after rehabilitation of post-canine teeth in man. J Dent Res 1994;73:1677-1683.
  7. Chewing efficiency in relation to occlusal and other variations in the natural human dentition. Br Dent J 1985;159:401-403.
  8. Masticatory performance and areas of occlusal contact and near contact in subjects with normal occlusion and malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002;121:602-609.
  9. The association between chewing efficiency and occlusal contact area in man. Arch Oral Biol 1993;38:589-596.
  10. Measurement of occlusal contact area effective in mastication. Am J Orthod 1949;35:185-195.
  11. The masticatory act. A review. J Prosthet Dent 1965;15:248-262.
  12. The intercuspal surface contact area registration: an additional tool for evaluation of normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 1973;43:96-106.
  13. Differences in molar relationships and occlusal contact areas evaluated from the buccal and lingual aspects using 3-dimensional digital models. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:182-189.
  14. An evaluation of occlusal contact marking indicators: a descriptive, qualitative method. Quintessence Int Dent Dig 1983;14:813-836.
  15. Thickness and marking characteristics of occlusal registration strips. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:122-126.
  16. Measurements on digital study models compared with plaster models: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2011;14:1-16.
  17. From alginate impressions to digital virtual models: accuracy and reproducibility. J Orthod 2009;36:36-41.
  18. Evaluation of anthropometric accuracy and reliability using different three-dimensional scanning systems. Forensic Sci Int 2011;207:127-134.
  19. Classification of malocclusion. Dent Cosmos 1899;41:248-264.
  20. An index for measuring the wear of teeth. Br Dent J 1984;156:435-438.
  21. www O3DM™ com 2013 Jan 20 [accessed 2013 Jan 20]; Available from: URL: http://www.O3DM™.com.
  22. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. New York, NY: Interscience Publications; 1940.
  23. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983;83:382-390.
  24. Palatal volume following rapid maxillary expansion in mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2010;80:153-159.
  25. Social research methods. 4th ed. London: Oxford University Press; 2012. p. 171-172.
  26. Attaining harmonic occlusion through visualized strain analysis. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46:615-622.
  27. Unilateral, isometric bite force in 8-68 year old women and men related to occlusal factors. Scand J Dent Res 1990;98:149-158.
  28. Reverse cycle chewing before and after orthodontic-surgical correction in class III patients. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2013;115:328-331.
  29. A test for occlusal function. The value of a masticatory efficiency test in the assessment of occlusal function. Br J Orthod 1987;14:85-90.
  30. The effect of mastication on occlusal parameters in healthy volunteers. Adv Med Sci 2008;53:316-320.
  31. Validity of 3-dimensional reconstruction and simulation of mandibular movement and occlusal contact. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:156-157.
  32. Four-dimensional analysis of stomatognathic function. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:276-287.
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.