Dataset Information

Comparative Study Qualitative and Quantitative Techniques in the Study of Occlusion.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The wide variety of methods for recording occlusal contacts and the contradictory data on the interpretation of the obtained markings provoked us to make a comparative laboratory study between different occlusal indicators.

Purpose

Evaluation of a qualitative and quantitative method for registration of occlusal contacts in static occlusion in laboratory conditions.

Materials and methods

In completion of the objective, we designed an apparatus for registration of the occlusal contacts (AROC) in static occlusion which is used, corresponding to the MIP in clinical conditions. The occlusal indicators that were included in the study were articulating paper 100 μ, articulating foil 12 μ, and T-Scan Novus system with a sensor thickness of 100 μ. The collected primary statistical information was entered and processed with the statistical package SPSS Statistics 19.0, and the graphs were prepared using Microsoft Office 2019. We performed descriptive statistical analysis in this study. Comparisons were performed using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Student's t-test, and Pearson coefficient method. For a significance level, p < 0.05 was chosen. Result and Discussion. With quality occlusal indicators, it is possible only to visually determine the size, number, and intensity of the marked contacts. After the statistical processing of the obtained data on the number of registered contacts, a significant difference is found in the number of contacts of certain teeth (18, 24, 25, 28, 38, 35, 34, 33, 44, 45, and 48) registered with articulating paper and articulating foil. The maximum force that is reported during the study with the T-Scan system is 93.72% and the forces in the right half of the dentition are 51.7% and in the left 48.9%. To visualize the location of the registered occlusal contacts with the system, it is intraoral to use a quality indicator and we recommend the use of articulating foil.

Conclusion

Based on findings from the current in vitro simulation, we can conclude that the type of occlusal indicator influences the registration of contacts, and therefore, we propose as a method of choice to achieve a balanced occlusion in clinical practice to combine the use of one conventional and one quantitative method.

SUBMITTER: Bozhkova T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8486563 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Statement of problemA working knowledge of the analytical capacities of contemporary registration methods is essential for prosthetic treatment; however, there is a paucity of studies which coherently investigate the capabilities and limitations of the various diagnostic procedures utilized for prosthetic occlusion.PurposeThe present prospective clinical study aimed to evaluate the similarities and differences among contemporary registration methods through comparative analysis.Material and methodsThe habitual static occlusion of 19 healthy individuals (14 women; mean age ± standard deviation, 30.8 ± 4.8 years) was analyzed 3 times a day, using shimstock foil, occlusal foil, wax registration, silicone registration, and computerized registration. The procedures were repeated after 14 days. Statistical analyses included all registrations referencing the first measurement point to assess the mean values of antagonistic contacts and the differences between these measurements. Pearson's and Kendall's correlation analyses were performed as part of the coherent mixed logistic regression model, and marginal probabilities were calculated using the registration technique and repeated measurements.ResultsStrong correlations were found among the various registration techniques. The largest effect sizes were observed among the wax, silicone, occlusion foil, and computerized registrations (r = 0.95, P < 0.001 to r = 0.62, P < 0.001), while the lowest effect sizes were found for shimstock correlations (τ = 0.41, P < 0.001 to τ = 0.27, P < 0.001). Occlusal changes per maxillary arch were observed referencing the first measurement time with wax registration (P < 0.001; 7.4%), shimstock foil (P < 0.001; 13.8%), computerized registration (P < 0.001; 20.3%), silicone registration (P = 0.009; 66.3%), and occlusion foil (P < 0.001; 98.8%). Occlusal changes per maxillary tooth were observed from the first incisor (P < 0.001; 5.7%) to the third molar (P < 0.001; 18.1%).ConclusionsThe results of the present study revealed that there are strong overall correlations among the various contemporary registration techniques. The different affinities of the techniques used to register occlusal changes, however, showed differences in the measurement techniques, which should be neither over- nor underestimated. The differential tendencies of teeth to change should be considered, even if a hypervariable system is assumed.

Project description:BackgroundGiving patients access to their health information is a provincial and national goal, and it is critical to the delivery of patient-centered care. With this shift, patient portals have become more prevalent. In Alberta, the Alberta Health Services piloted a portal (MyChart). There was a need to identify factors that promoted the use of this portal. Furthermore, it was imperative to understand why there was variability in uptake within the various clinics that participated in the pilot.ObjectiveThis study aims to identify potential factors that could improve the uptake of MyChart from the perspectives of both users and nonusers at pilot sites. We focused on factors that promoted the use of MyChart along with related benefits and barriers to its use, with the intention that this information could be incorporated into the plan for its province-wide implementation.MethodsA qualitative comparative case study was conducted to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and initial perceptions of users and to identify ways to increase uptake. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 56 participants (27 patients, 21 providers, 4 nonmedical staff, and 4 clinic managers) from 5 clinics. Patients were asked about the impact of MyChart on their health and health care. Providers were asked about the impact on the patient-provider relationship and workflow. Managers were asked about barriers to implementation. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and entered into NVivo. A thematic analysis was used to analyze the data.ResultsResults from a comparison of factors related to uptake of MyChart in 5 clinics (2 clinics with high uptake, 1 with moderate uptake, 1 with low uptake, and 1 with no uptake) are reported. Some theoretical constructs in our study, such as intention to use, perceived value, similarity (novelty) of the technology, and patient health needs, were similar to findings published by other research teams. We also identified some new factors associated with uptake, including satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the current status quo, performance expectancy, facilitating conditions, behavioral intentions, and use behavior. All these factors had an impact on the level of uptake in each setting and created different opportunities for end users.ConclusionsThere is limited research on factors that influence the uptake of patient portals. We identified some factors that were consistent with those reported by others but also several new factors that were associated with the update of MyChart, a new patient portal, in the clinics we studied. On the basis of our results, we posit that a shared understanding of the technology among patients, clinicians, and managers, along with dissatisfaction with nonportal-based communications, is foundational and must be addressed for patient portals to support improvements in care.