Camila Nobre de Freitas, Paula Midori Castelo, Pedro Yoshito Noritomi, Kelly Guedes de Oliveira Scudine, Regina Maria Puppin Rontani, Thanus Miziara, Leonardo Mendes Ribeiro Machado
{"title":"Mechanical stress distribution over the palate by different pacifiers assessed by finite element analysis and clinical data","authors":"Camila Nobre de Freitas, Paula Midori Castelo, Pedro Yoshito Noritomi, Kelly Guedes de Oliveira Scudine, Regina Maria Puppin Rontani, Thanus Miziara, Leonardo Mendes Ribeiro Machado","doi":"10.1002/ca.24126","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The mechanical behavior of each type of pacifier on rigid structures and their various impacts on orofacial growth have yet to be discovered. The study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution over a child's palate by three types of pacifiers using finite element analysis and clinical and laboratory data. Modulus of elasticity was obtained from 30 specimens comprising 10 of each conventional (A), orthodontic (B), and breast-shaped (C) pacifiers. Tongue strength was assessed in eight 3-year-old children (kPa). A hemi-maxilla model was obtained from 2- to 3-year-old skull tomography, and the images of pacifiers A, B, and C were captured using 3D scanning. The Hypermesh® program generated a mesh of 6-node tetrahedral elements for applying forces in the X, Y, and Z directions to enable a nonlinear analysis. Pacifier B exhibited the highest values for distributed stress on the palate, followed by pacifier A. Pacifier B stimulated the maxilla forward and sideways. In contrast, pacifier A promoted a forward and upward load, favoring a more atresic palate. Pacifiers A and B tended to rotate in the sagittal plane, generating tensions in the anterior incisors and favoring the open bite. Pacifier C exhibited lateral expansion by stress induction over the mid-palatal suture with less influence on incisor inclination. Pacifiers showed different detrimental stress distributions on the palate. This information can be helpful for improving recommendations given to parents.</p>","PeriodicalId":50687,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Anatomy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Anatomy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ca.24126","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The mechanical behavior of each type of pacifier on rigid structures and their various impacts on orofacial growth have yet to be discovered. The study aimed to evaluate the stress distribution over a child's palate by three types of pacifiers using finite element analysis and clinical and laboratory data. Modulus of elasticity was obtained from 30 specimens comprising 10 of each conventional (A), orthodontic (B), and breast-shaped (C) pacifiers. Tongue strength was assessed in eight 3-year-old children (kPa). A hemi-maxilla model was obtained from 2- to 3-year-old skull tomography, and the images of pacifiers A, B, and C were captured using 3D scanning. The Hypermesh® program generated a mesh of 6-node tetrahedral elements for applying forces in the X, Y, and Z directions to enable a nonlinear analysis. Pacifier B exhibited the highest values for distributed stress on the palate, followed by pacifier A. Pacifier B stimulated the maxilla forward and sideways. In contrast, pacifier A promoted a forward and upward load, favoring a more atresic palate. Pacifiers A and B tended to rotate in the sagittal plane, generating tensions in the anterior incisors and favoring the open bite. Pacifier C exhibited lateral expansion by stress induction over the mid-palatal suture with less influence on incisor inclination. Pacifiers showed different detrimental stress distributions on the palate. This information can be helpful for improving recommendations given to parents.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Anatomy is the Official Journal of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists and the British Association of Clinical Anatomists. The goal of Clinical Anatomy is to provide a medium for the exchange of current information between anatomists and clinicians. This journal embraces anatomy in all its aspects as applied to medical practice. Furthermore, the journal assists physicians and other health care providers in keeping abreast of new methodologies for patient management and informs educators of new developments in clinical anatomy and teaching techniques. Clinical Anatomy publishes original and review articles of scientific, clinical, and educational interest. Papers covering the application of anatomic principles to the solution of clinical problems and/or the application of clinical observations to expand anatomic knowledge are welcomed.