A. Polašek, Manuela Plisko, Anja Profozić, Antonia Plazibat, Samir Čimić
{"title":"Study of the Difference Between Centric Occlusion and Retruded Contact Position","authors":"A. Polašek, Manuela Plisko, Anja Profozić, Antonia Plazibat, Samir Čimić","doi":"10.12974/2311-8695.2022.10.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between retruded contact position (RCP) and centric occlusion (CO) at the level of mandibular condyles. \nMaterials and methods: Study included 20 completely dentate participants (average 24.4 ± 1.2 years). All recordings of the condylar deviations were measured with the use of the ultrasound mandibular recording device with six degrees of freedom. CO was determined using active method of centric relation recording (participants were trained to stationary hinge and maintain the position of the lower jaw at the first tooth contact/contacts). RCP was determined with passive method of centric relation recording (chin point guidance). RCP and CO deviations to the reference position (habitual occlusion) were recorded with the use of the mandibular recording device at the level of x (anterior – posterior), y (vertical) and z (lateral) axes. Linear RCP and CO deviations (from the habitual occlusion) were measured. Descriptive statistics was measured, and the RCP and CO deviation values were compared using independent samples T test. \nResults: Average linear condylar deviation values for the CO were 1.30 ± 1.14 mm, and 2.13 ± 1.89 mm for the RCP. Independent samples T test showed statistically significant difference between RCP and CO linear deviation values (α=0.021). \nConclusions: There is a difference in the positioning of the condyle within temporomandibular joint, with passive or active centric relation recording methods. CO and RCP can be identified as different occlusal positions.","PeriodicalId":76664,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8695.2022.10.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between retruded contact position (RCP) and centric occlusion (CO) at the level of mandibular condyles.
Materials and methods: Study included 20 completely dentate participants (average 24.4 ± 1.2 years). All recordings of the condylar deviations were measured with the use of the ultrasound mandibular recording device with six degrees of freedom. CO was determined using active method of centric relation recording (participants were trained to stationary hinge and maintain the position of the lower jaw at the first tooth contact/contacts). RCP was determined with passive method of centric relation recording (chin point guidance). RCP and CO deviations to the reference position (habitual occlusion) were recorded with the use of the mandibular recording device at the level of x (anterior – posterior), y (vertical) and z (lateral) axes. Linear RCP and CO deviations (from the habitual occlusion) were measured. Descriptive statistics was measured, and the RCP and CO deviation values were compared using independent samples T test.
Results: Average linear condylar deviation values for the CO were 1.30 ± 1.14 mm, and 2.13 ± 1.89 mm for the RCP. Independent samples T test showed statistically significant difference between RCP and CO linear deviation values (α=0.021).
Conclusions: There is a difference in the positioning of the condyle within temporomandibular joint, with passive or active centric relation recording methods. CO and RCP can be identified as different occlusal positions.
目的:本研究的目的是探讨下颌骨髁突水平的后退接触位置(RCP)和中心咬合(CO)的差异。材料和方法:研究纳入20例全齿受试者(平均24.4±1.2岁)。使用六自由度超声下颌骨记录装置测量所有髁突偏差的记录。使用中心关系记录的主动方法确定CO(参与者被训练为固定铰链并保持下颌在第一颗牙齿接触处的位置)。采用被动中心关系记录法(颏点导引法)测定RCP。使用下颌记录装置在x(前后),y(垂直)和z(侧)轴水平记录RCP和CO到参考位置(习惯性咬合)的偏差。测量线性RCP和CO偏差(习惯性闭塞)。进行描述性统计,采用独立样本T检验比较RCP和CO偏差值。结果:CO的平均直线偏差值为1.30±1.14 mm, RCP为2.13±1.89 mm。独立样本T检验显示,RCP与CO的线性偏差值差异有统计学意义(α=0.021)。结论:采用被动和主动中心关系记录方法,髁突在颞下颌关节内的定位存在差异。CO和RCP可以被识别为不同的咬合位置。