Comparative Evaluation of Stress Distribution Pattern between Modified and Conventional Mouthguard on Maxillary Jaw when Standardized Forces are Applied Horizontally in a 14-year-old Child: A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis
Shivani V Sawant, Ritesh Kalaskar
Keywords :
14-year-old child, Conventional mouthguard, Finite element analysis, In vitro study, Modified mouthguard, Stress distribution pattern
Citation Information :
Sawant SV, Kalaskar R. Comparative Evaluation of Stress Distribution Pattern between Modified and Conventional Mouthguard on Maxillary Jaw when Standardized Forces are Applied Horizontally in a 14-year-old Child: A Three-dimensional Finite Element Analysis. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2025; 18 (1):1-5.
Aims and background: Conventional mouthguards, due to their increased thickness, are uncomfortable for the players. To increase the acceptability of mouthguards among players, this led to the development of a mouthguard that is 4 mm thick anteriorly and 2 mm thick posteriorly.
In order to recommend this modified mouthguard to players, we need to find out its stress distribution pattern. For this, finite element analysis can be done in vitro.
To evaluate and compare the stress distribution pattern of the modified and conventional mouthguards when exposed to a standardized force of 614 N horizontally on the maxillary jaw using finite element analysis.
Materials and methods: Modified and conventional mouthguard models were created after obtaining a cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of a 14-year-old child. Standardized forces were applied to 4 points (nodes) of the maxillary jaw.
Results: The modified mouthguard showed minimum stress distribution in the left premolar region (1.83 MPa), whereas maximum stress distribution was observed in the maxillary left lateral incisor region (24.04 MPa).
The conventional and modified mouthguards showed a displacement of 0.00624 mm and 0.000441 mm in the left premolar region, respectively.
Conclusion: The modified mouthguard not only showed lower stress distribution but also exhibited minimum displacement compared to the conventional mouthguard when exposed to a standardized force of 614 N.
Clinical significance: By reducing the thickness of the mouthguard, we can increase the acceptability of mouthguards among skating athletes.
Ranalli DN. Prevention of sports-related traumatic injuries. Dent Clin North Am 2000;44:35–51. DOI: 10.1016/S0011-8532(22)01723-2
Tewari N, Mathur VP, Siddiqui I, et al. Prevalence of traumatic dental injuries in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Indian J Dent Res 2020;31(4):601–614.
Kalaskar AR, Kalaskar R. Knowledge and attitude of the sports teachers in central India towards oro-facial injuries and the use of mouth guard. J Sports Med Doping Stud 2016;6:2161–2673.
Farrington T, Onambele-Pearson G, Taylor RL, et al. A review of facial protective equipment use in sport and the impact on injury incidence. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012;50:233–238.
Verissimo C, Costa PV, Santos-Filho PC, et al. Custom-fitted EVA mouthguards: what is the ideal thickness? A dynamic finite element impact study. Dent Traumatol 2016;32(2):95–102.
Mansur DI, Haque MK, Sharma K, et al. A study on nutritional status of rural school going children in Kavre district. Kathmandu Univ Med J 2015;13:146–151.
Sepet E, Aren G, Dogan Onur O, et al. Knowledge of sports participants about dental emergency procedures and the use of mouthguards. Dent Traumatol 2014;30:391–395.
Newsome PR, Trn DC, Cooke MS. The role of the mouthguard in the prevention of sports-related dental injuries: a review. Int J Paediatr Dent 2001;11:396–404.
Kalyan C. Comfort and acceptability of different types of mouthguards among 7-12 years old children at skating rink. Ann Ess Dent 2011;3:19–23. DOI: 10.5368/aedj.2011.3.2.1.4
Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Kalman L. Stress concentration of hybrid occlusal splint-mouthguard during a simulated maxillofacial traumatic impact: 3D-FEA. Dent J (Basel) 2022;10(4):65.
Takahashi M, Koide K, Iwasaki S. Thickness of mouthguard sheets after vacuum-pressure formation: Influence of mouthguard sheet material. Dent Traumatol 2016;32:201–205. DOI: 10.1111/edt.12231
Tribst JPM, Dal Piva AMO, Ausiello P, et al. Biomechanical analysis of a custom-made mouthguard reinforced with different elastic modulus laminates during a simulated maxillofacial trauma. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 2021;14(3):254–260.
Gialain IO, Coto NP, Driemeier L, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of the sports mouthguard. Dent Traumatol 2016;32(5):409–415.