Comparison of shock absorption capacities of three types of mouthguards: A comparative in vitro study

Author:

Arfi Yohan1ORCID,Benoit Aurélie1ORCID,Tapie Laurent12ORCID,Sandoz Baptiste3ORCID,Persohn Sylvain3ORCID,Attal Jean‐Pierre14ORCID,Rignon‐Bret Christophe14ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Innovative Biomaterials and Interfaces Research Unit – UR4462 University Paris Cité Montrouge France

2. EPF School of Engineering Cachan France

3. Arts et Métiers Institute of Technology University Sorbonne Paris Nord, IBHGC, University HESAM Paris France

4. Charles Foix Hospital – AP‐HP Ivry‐sur‐Seine France

Abstract

AbstractBackground/Aim3D printing processes can be used to manufacture custom‐made mouthguards for sports activities. Few studies have compared the impact performance of industrial‐created mouthguards with that of custom‐made mouthguards manufactured by thermoforming or 3D printing. The objective of this in vitro study was to compare the shock absorption capacities of custom‐made mouthguards manufactured by 3D printing with industrial mouthguards and thermoformed ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) mouthguards.Materials and MethodsFor each type of mouthguard, eight samples were produced. 3D‐printed mouthguards were manufactured using digital light processing technology. Each mouthguard was subjected to an impact performance test defined by the standard AFNOR XP S72‐427, which evaluate maximum deceleration and force transmitted during impact. The thickness of each mouthguard before and after a series of five impacts was measured at the impacted inter‐incisal area.ResultsThe mean maximum decelerations during impact ranged from 129 to 189 g for industrial mouthguards, 287 to 425 g for thermoformed EVA mouthguards, and 277 to 302 g for 3D‐printed mouthguards. The mean reduction in mouthguard thickness at the impact zone after five tests was 1.2 mm for industrial mouthguards, 0.6 mm for 3D‐printed mouthguards, and 2.2 mm for thermoformed EVA mouthguards.ConclusionsCustom‐made 3D printed mouthguards showed slightly better shock absorption ability than thermoformed mouthguards with respect to the indicator proposed in XP S72‐427. They seemed to combine the practical advantages of thermoformed mouthguards in sports with better shock absorption capacity and lower cost. Furthermore, they had the least thickness variation during the test, and their shock absorption capacity was the least affected by repeated mechanical tests. Other types of 3D‐printing resin materials that will become available must continue to be tested for shock absorption to provide the best protection to users at low cost.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3