Dae-Sung Kim, So-Hyung Park, Jong-Ju Ahn, Chang-Mo Jeong, Mi-Jung Yun, Jung-Bo Huh, So-Hyoun Lee
{"title":"面弓和POP弓系统在不对称耳朵位置下咬合平面转移方法准确性的体外比较。","authors":"Dae-Sung Kim, So-Hyung Park, Jong-Ju Ahn, Chang-Mo Jeong, Mi-Jung Yun, Jung-Bo Huh, So-Hyoun Lee","doi":"10.4047/jap.2023.15.5.271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of the conventional facebow system and the newly developed POP (PNUD (Pusan National University Dental School) Occlusal Plane) bow system for occlusal plane transfer in asymmetric ear position. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two dentists participated in this study, one was categorized as Experimenter 1 and the other as Experimenter 2 based on their clinical experience with the facebow (1F, 2F) and POP bow (1P, 2P) systems. The vertical height difference between the two ears of the phantom model was set to 3 mm. Experimenter 1 and Experimenter 2 performed the facebow and POP bow systems on the phantom model 10 times each, and the transfer accuracy was analyzed. The accuracy was evaluated by measuring the angle between the reference virtual plane (RVP) of the phantom model and the experimental virtual plane (EVP) of the upper mounting plate through digital superimposition. All data were statistically analyzed using a paired t-test (P < .05). RESULTS Regardless of clinical experience, the POP bow system (0.53° ± 0.30 (1P) and 0.19° ± 0.18 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) was significantly more accurate than the facebow system (1.88° ± 0.50 (1F) and 1.34° ± 0.25 (2F), respectively) in the frontal view (P < .05). In the sagittal view, no significant differences were found between the POP bow system (0.92° ± 0.50 (1P) and 0.73° ± 0.42 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) and the facebow system (0.82° ± 0.49 (1F) and 0.60° ± 0.39 (2F), respectively), regardless of clinical experience (P > .05). CONCLUSION In cases of asymmetric ear position, the POP bow system may transfer occlusal plane information more accurately than the facebow system in the frontal view, regardless of clinical experience.","PeriodicalId":51291,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","volume":"15 5","pages":"271-280"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10625888/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"<i>In vitro</i> comparison of the accuracy of an occlusal plane transfer method between facebow and POP bow systems in asymmetric ear position.\",\"authors\":\"Dae-Sung Kim, So-Hyung Park, Jong-Ju Ahn, Chang-Mo Jeong, Mi-Jung Yun, Jung-Bo Huh, So-Hyoun Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.4047/jap.2023.15.5.271\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PURPOSE This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of the conventional facebow system and the newly developed POP (PNUD (Pusan National University Dental School) Occlusal Plane) bow system for occlusal plane transfer in asymmetric ear position. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two dentists participated in this study, one was categorized as Experimenter 1 and the other as Experimenter 2 based on their clinical experience with the facebow (1F, 2F) and POP bow (1P, 2P) systems. The vertical height difference between the two ears of the phantom model was set to 3 mm. Experimenter 1 and Experimenter 2 performed the facebow and POP bow systems on the phantom model 10 times each, and the transfer accuracy was analyzed. The accuracy was evaluated by measuring the angle between the reference virtual plane (RVP) of the phantom model and the experimental virtual plane (EVP) of the upper mounting plate through digital superimposition. All data were statistically analyzed using a paired t-test (P < .05). RESULTS Regardless of clinical experience, the POP bow system (0.53° ± 0.30 (1P) and 0.19° ± 0.18 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) was significantly more accurate than the facebow system (1.88° ± 0.50 (1F) and 1.34° ± 0.25 (2F), respectively) in the frontal view (P < .05). In the sagittal view, no significant differences were found between the POP bow system (0.92° ± 0.50 (1P) and 0.73° ± 0.42 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) and the facebow system (0.82° ± 0.49 (1F) and 0.60° ± 0.39 (2F), respectively), regardless of clinical experience (P > .05). CONCLUSION In cases of asymmetric ear position, the POP bow system may transfer occlusal plane information more accurately than the facebow system in the frontal view, regardless of clinical experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"volume\":\"15 5\",\"pages\":\"271-280\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10625888/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2023.15.5.271\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2023.15.5.271","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
In vitro comparison of the accuracy of an occlusal plane transfer method between facebow and POP bow systems in asymmetric ear position.
PURPOSE This in vitro study aimed to compare the accuracy of the conventional facebow system and the newly developed POP (PNUD (Pusan National University Dental School) Occlusal Plane) bow system for occlusal plane transfer in asymmetric ear position. MATERIALS AND METHODS Two dentists participated in this study, one was categorized as Experimenter 1 and the other as Experimenter 2 based on their clinical experience with the facebow (1F, 2F) and POP bow (1P, 2P) systems. The vertical height difference between the two ears of the phantom model was set to 3 mm. Experimenter 1 and Experimenter 2 performed the facebow and POP bow systems on the phantom model 10 times each, and the transfer accuracy was analyzed. The accuracy was evaluated by measuring the angle between the reference virtual plane (RVP) of the phantom model and the experimental virtual plane (EVP) of the upper mounting plate through digital superimposition. All data were statistically analyzed using a paired t-test (P < .05). RESULTS Regardless of clinical experience, the POP bow system (0.53° ± 0.30 (1P) and 0.19° ± 0.18 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) was significantly more accurate than the facebow system (1.88° ± 0.50 (1F) and 1.34° ± 0.25 (2F), respectively) in the frontal view (P < .05). In the sagittal view, no significant differences were found between the POP bow system (0.92° ± 0.50 (1P) and 0.73° ± 0.42 (2P) for Experimenter 1 and 2, respectively) and the facebow system (0.82° ± 0.49 (1F) and 0.60° ± 0.39 (2F), respectively), regardless of clinical experience (P > .05). CONCLUSION In cases of asymmetric ear position, the POP bow system may transfer occlusal plane information more accurately than the facebow system in the frontal view, regardless of clinical experience.
期刊介绍:
This journal aims to convey scientific and clinical progress in the field of prosthodontics and its related areas to many dental communities concerned with esthetic and functional restorations, occlusion, implants, prostheses, and biomaterials related to prosthodontics.
This journal publishes
• Original research data of high scientific merit in the field of diagnosis, function, esthetics and stomatognathic physiology related to prosthodontic rehabilitation, physiology and mechanics of occlusion, mechanical and biologic aspects of prosthodontic materials including dental implants.
• Review articles by experts on controversies and new developments in prosthodontics.
• Case reports if they provide or document new fundamental knowledge.