The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Related articles

VOLUME 22 , ISSUE 6 ( June, 2021 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Reliability of the Intraoral Records for programming the Condylar Inclination of the Semiadjustable Articulator

Suasti Mendoza Diego, Del Valle Lovato Juan

Keywords : Condylar inclination, Intraoral records, Protrusion record, Semiadjustable articulator

Citation Information : Diego SM, Juan DV. Reliability of the Intraoral Records for programming the Condylar Inclination of the Semiadjustable Articulator. J Contemp Dent Pract 2021; 22 (6):624-629.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3109

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 09-08-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aim and objective: The purpose of the investigation was to determine the reliability of intraoral records for the programming of the condylar inclination of the semiadjustable articulator (SAA), performed by dentistry students at the Central University of Ecuador (UCE). Materials and methods: The concordance study was of an observational type and was carried out in sixth- and seventh-semester students of the Faculty of Dentistry of the UCE in the period 2019 to 2020. It was applied to a sample made up of 60 students: divided into G1 (n = 30), sixth-semester students and G2 (n = 30), seventh-semester students. The students were given articulated plaster models in an SAA in order to program the condylar inclination based on intraoral records, comparing it with the condylar inclination obtained from a computed tomography (CT) scan by an expert, determining inter-rater reliability. A Fleiss’ Kappa test was performed for this study, with a 95% confidence level. Results: The average condylar inclination of the left side measured by the groups of students was 28.68° ± 10.16° and for the right side it was 27.85° ± 10.59°, while in CT, it was 45° on the left side and 35° on the right side. The range of discrepancy of the groups with the CT values is 4.30° to 19.11°, with a significant difference between the programmed condylar inclination of the SAA between the study groups (p <0.05), with greater amount of success in G1 (40% of students programmed the condylar inclination perfectly) compared to G2 (31.67% of students did it perfectly). Conclusion: When performing the Fleiss’ Kappa test, the concordance of the condylar inclination in an SAA programmed by the students gave a result with a negative sign, which suggests that there is no concordance of the articulator data compared to the CT, verifying that the students are not trained in this practice. Clinical significance: The clinical significance of this study lies in the fact that students must learn to better program the condylar inclination so that the treatments they carry out in the future are jointly and preserving all the normal anatomical factors related to the mouth and the TMJ, in order to do so. achieve more personalized treatments for each patient.


PDF Share
  1. Prasad D, Shah N, Hegde C. A clinico-radiographic analysis of sagittal condylar guidance determined by protrusive interocclusal registration and panoramic radiographic images in humans. Contemp Clin Dent 2012;3(4):383–387. DOI: 10.4103/0976-237X.107419. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23633793/.
  2. Shetty S, Kunta M, Shenoy, K. A clinico-radiographic study to compare and co-relate sagittal condylar guidance determined by intraoral gothic arch tracing method and panoramic radiograph in completely edentulous patients. J Indian Prosthodontic Soc Jan-Mar 2018;18(1):19-23. doi: 10.4103/jips.jips_207_17. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29430137/.
  3. Ventura de la Torre J, Domínguez Cardoso P, Cañadas Rodríguez D, et al. Fiabilidad y validez de los diferentes sistemas de registros de la inclinación de la trayectoria condilar (ITC): Revisión bibliográfica. Av Odontoestomatol 2007;23(2):83–90. DOI: 10.4321/S0213-12852007000200004. Available from: https://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/odonto/v23n2/original3.pdf.
  4. Curtis DA. A comparison of protrusive interocclusal records to pantographic tracings. J Prosthet Dent 1989;62(2):154–156. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(89)90303-X. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2668509/.
  5. Tannamala P, Pulagam M, Pottem S, et al. Condylar guidance: correlation between protrusive interocclusal record and panoramic radiographic image: a pilot study. J Prosthodont 2012;21(3):181–184. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00811.x. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22339685/.
  6. Bhawsar SV, Marathe AS, Ansari SA. Evaluation of Hanau's formula in determination of lateral condylar guidance: a clinical research study. J Indian Prosthodontic Soc 2015;15(4):326–330. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.161566. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26929535/.
  7. Javid N, Porter M. The importance of the Hanau formila in construction of complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent 1975;34(4):397–404. DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(75)90156-0. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1100807/.
  8. Pesce Ortega MC, Barbano Maturana M, Saldivia Berríos J, et al. Comparación de la posición condilar entre dos técnicas de registro de relación céntrica mediante tomografía espiral. Rev Clin Periodoncia Implantol Rehabil Oral 2014;7(1):21–24. DOI: 10.4067/S0719-01072014000100005. Available from: https://scielo.conicyt.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0719-01072014000100005.
  9. Alonso P, Albertini J, Bechelli A. Oclusión y Diagnóstico en Rehabilitación Oral [Internet]. Buenos Aires: Editorial Médica Panamericana Sa de; 1999. Available from: https://www.edicionesjournal.com/Papel/9789500600705/Oclusión+y+Diagnóstico+en+Rehabilitación+Oral.
  10. Mawani D, Muddugangadhar B, Das A, et al. Comparative evaluation of condylar inclination in dentulous subjects as determined by two radiographic methods: orthopantomograph and cone-beam computed tomography – an in vivo study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2019;19(2):113–119. DOI: 10.4103/jips.jips_266_18. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31040544/.
  11. Galagali G, Kalekhan S, Nidawani P, et al. Comparative analysis of sagittal condylar guidance by protrusive interocclusal records with panoramic and lateral cephalogram radiographs in dentulous population: a clinico-radiographic study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 2016;16(2):148–153. DOI: 10.4103/0972-4052.179322. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27141164/.
  12. Shrestha P, Jain V, Seith Bhalla A, et al. A comparative study to measure the condylar guidance by the radiographic and clinical methods. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4(3):153–157. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2012.4.3.153. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22977723/.
  13. Kwon OK, Yang S, Kim JH. Correlation between sagittal condylar guidance angles obtained using radiographic and protrusive occlusal record methods. J Adv Prosthodont 2017;9(4):302–307. DOI: 10.4047/jap.2017.9.4.302. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28874998/.
  14. Peraire M, Gomis JM, Cantarell JMA, et al. Factores que alteran la exactitud y precisión en la determinación del ángulo de la guía condílea mediante registros de cera con un articulador semiajustable. Rev Eur Odontoestomatol 2002;14(5):257–262. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/43553638.pdf.
  15. Hindle J, Craddock H. The use of articulators in UK dental schools. Eur J Dent Educ 2006;10(4):197–203. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0579.2006.00416.x. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17038011/.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.