Many molding techniques have been researched to ensure the thickness of custom mouthguards. The aim of this study was to clarify the effect on the thickness of a laminated mouthguard of a molding technique in which th...Many molding techniques have been researched to ensure the thickness of custom mouthguards. The aim of this study was to clarify the effect on the thickness of a laminated mouthguard of a molding technique in which the model position is moved forward just before molding. Mouthguards were molded using a 3.0-mm-thick ethylene vinyl acetate mouthguard sheet and a pressure molding machine. The molding method was the normal molding method (condition C) and the molding technique (condition MP) in which the model position was moved 20 mm forward just before molding. Regarding the molding of the first layer (F) and the second layer (S), the following four molding methods based on the combination of conditions C and MP were compared;FC-SC, FC-SMP, FMP-SC, and FMP-SMP. Differences in mouthguard thickness due to molding conditions for the first and second layers were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni’s multiple comparison test. Significant differences were observed among all molding conditions on the labial surface, and the thicknesses were in the order FC-SC < FC-SMP < FMP-SC < FMP-SMP. FMP-SMP was 4.67 mm thick, which was 1.39 mm thicker than FC-SC. FC-SC was the thinnest at the cusp, and a significant difference was observed between other molding conditions. On the buccal side, significant differences were observed between all conditions except FC-SMP and FMP-SC, and the thicknesses were in the order FC-SC < FC-SMP, FMP-SC < FMP-SMP. The results of this study suggested that the labial and buccal sides of laminated mouthguards could be made 1.4 and 1.2 times thicker when a molding technique that moves the model position just before formation was used for the first and second layers. The reduction in thickness was suppressed by approximately 23.2% and approximately 10.7% on the labial and buccal sides, respectively, compared with the normal molding method.展开更多
文摘Many molding techniques have been researched to ensure the thickness of custom mouthguards. The aim of this study was to clarify the effect on the thickness of a laminated mouthguard of a molding technique in which the model position is moved forward just before molding. Mouthguards were molded using a 3.0-mm-thick ethylene vinyl acetate mouthguard sheet and a pressure molding machine. The molding method was the normal molding method (condition C) and the molding technique (condition MP) in which the model position was moved 20 mm forward just before molding. Regarding the molding of the first layer (F) and the second layer (S), the following four molding methods based on the combination of conditions C and MP were compared;FC-SC, FC-SMP, FMP-SC, and FMP-SMP. Differences in mouthguard thickness due to molding conditions for the first and second layers were analyzed by two-way ANOVA and Bonferroni’s multiple comparison test. Significant differences were observed among all molding conditions on the labial surface, and the thicknesses were in the order FC-SC < FC-SMP < FMP-SC < FMP-SMP. FMP-SMP was 4.67 mm thick, which was 1.39 mm thicker than FC-SC. FC-SC was the thinnest at the cusp, and a significant difference was observed between other molding conditions. On the buccal side, significant differences were observed between all conditions except FC-SMP and FMP-SC, and the thicknesses were in the order FC-SC < FC-SMP, FMP-SC < FMP-SMP. The results of this study suggested that the labial and buccal sides of laminated mouthguards could be made 1.4 and 1.2 times thicker when a molding technique that moves the model position just before formation was used for the first and second layers. The reduction in thickness was suppressed by approximately 23.2% and approximately 10.7% on the labial and buccal sides, respectively, compared with the normal molding method.
