International Journal of Experimental Dental Science

Register      Login

VOLUME 6 , ISSUE 2 ( July-December, 2017 ) > List of Articles

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Verification of the Accuracy of Electronic Mandibular Movement-recording Devices: An in vitro Investigation

Swati Ahuja, Mark Scarbecz, Heath Balch, David R Cagna

Citation Information : Ahuja S, Scarbecz M, Balch H, R Cagna D. Verification of the Accuracy of Electronic Mandibular Movement-recording Devices: An in vitro Investigation. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2017; 6 (2):84-94.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10029-1162

License: CC BY 3.0

Published Online: 01-12-2017

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2017; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.


Abstract

Aims and objectives

To determine the accuracy of an opto-electronic pantograph (Freecorder Bluefox, Dentron) in locating a known transverse horizontal axis (THA); To determine the accuracy of the opto-electronic pantograph and the mechano-electronic pantograph (Cadiax Compact 2, Whip Mix Corp) in recording preset condylar control values; and additionally, compare the accuracy of the opto-electronic and mechano-electronic pantographs with each other.

Materials and methods

A fully adjustable articulator (Denar D5A, Whip Mix Corp) was employed as a mock patient. True condylar control settings and condylar control values determined by each recording device were documented and statistically analyzed using 2-sample independent t-tests (p < 0.05).

Results

Statistical data analysis indicated that (1) the opto-electronic pantograph did not accurately locate the known THA; (2) the condylar control values registered by opto-electronic and the mechano-electronic pantographs were statistically different from the preset condylar control values; and (3) different degrees of accuracy existed between the opto-electronic pantograph and mechano-electronic pantograph.

Conclusion

Errors up to 5 mm in the location of the THA may not have much clinical significance. The majority of articulator condylar control settings predicted by the opto-electronic and mechano-electronic pantographs investigated in this study were statistically different. Clinically, the predicted mean values for the lateral condylar inclination (LCI) and progressive mandibular lateral translation (PMLT) were within 5° of the known mock patient settings. However, the medial wall angulation and immediate side shift values obtained from the opto-electronic instrument suffered from large errors.

Clinical implication

Practical goals for complex restorative dentistry often include attaining accurate occlusal relationships, simulating the patient's mandibular movements in the laboratory using three-dimensional instrumentation and achieving desired occlusal contacts and relationships. Clinicians may rely on mandibular motion-recording devices to render accurate and useful information. Cost of purchase of electronic mandibular motion-recording devices (opto-electronic and mechano-electronic recorders), their accuracy, and time required for training should be compared with the use of conventional pantographs. The use of electronic pantograph may lead to savings in time and efforts over conventional pantograph and interocclusal records.

How to cite this article

Balch H, Cagna DR, Ahuja S, Scarbecz M. Verification of the Accuracy of Electronic Mandibular Movement-recording Devices: An in vitro Investigation. Int J Experiment Dent Sci 2017;6(2):84-94.


  1. ; Stuart, CE. Gnathology — a research report. Ventura (CA): Scientific Press; 1955. p. 12-30, 34, 86-91.
  2. Accuracy in measuring functional dimensions and relations in oral prosthesis. J Prosthet Dent 1959 Mar-Apr;9(2):220-236.
  3. Occlusion in fixed prosthodontics: a historical perspective of the Gnathological influence. J Prosthet Dent 2008 Apr;99(4):299-313.
  4. Articulator selection for restorative dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1976 Jul;36(1):35-43.
  5. ; Regenos, JW.; Taylor, RR. Principles of occlusion: laboratory and clinical teaching manual. Columbus (OH): H & R Press; 1969.
  6. Condylar determinants of occlusal patterns. J Prosthet Dent 1965 Sep-Oct;15(5):826-846.
  7. An evaluation of mandibular border movements: their character and significance. J Prosthet Dent 1978 Oct;40(4):442-452.
  8. Effects of changes in articulator settings on generated occlusal tracings. Part II. Immediate side shift, intercondylar distance, and rear and top wall settings. J Prosthet Dent 1991 Mar;65(3):377-382.
  9. Comparison of Bennett shift measured at the hinge axis and an arbitrary hinge axis position. J Prosthet Dent 1984 Mar;51(3):407-410.
  10. A study of the arbitrary center and the kinematic center of rotation for face-bow mountings. J Prosthet Dent 1957 Mar;7(2):162-169.
  11. A clinical evaluation of arcon concept of articulation. J Prosthet Dent 1959 May-Jun;9(3):409-421.
  12. The accuracy of an ear face-bow. J Prosthet Dent 1966 Nov-Dec;16(6):1039-1046.
  13. A comparison of articulator settings obtained by using an electronic pantograph and lateral interocclusal recordings. J Prosthet Dent 1988 Aug;60(2):159-164.
  14. ; Stallard, H. Condylar determinants to be found in the patient and put in the controls of an articulator if cusps are to be reproduced on teeth correctly. In:Pavone's BW, editor. Oral rehabilitation and occlusion — A compilation of Papers Written by Harvey Stallard, Ph.D, D.D.S. and Charles E. Stuart, D.D.S.Vol. 2. San Francisco: University of California San Francisco Medical Center; 1969. p. 43-53.
  15. Determinants of occlusion. In: Stuart's CE, editor. Oral rehabilitation and occlusion with some basic principles on gnathology. Vol. 5. Ventura (CA): C. E. Stuart Gnathological Instruments; 1976. p. 107-116.
  16. Errors incurred in programming a fully adjustable articulator with a pantograph. J Prosthet Dent 1986 Apr;55(4):427-429.
  17. The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent 2005 Jul;94(1):10-92.
  18. Border positions and restoring occlusion. Dent Clin North Am 1971 Jul;15(3):525-542.
  19. Modern gnathological concepts — updated. Chicago (IL): Quintessence Publishing Co.; 1983.
  20. An in vitro study of an electronic pantograph. J Prosthet Dent 1987 May;57(5):577-580.
  21. Graphic recordings of mandibular movements: research criteria. J Prosthet Dent 1971 Mar;25(3):287-298.
  22. Pantographic tracings of mandibular movements and occlusion. J Prosthet Dent 1971 Apr;25(4):389-396.
  23. Comparison of an electronic and a mechanical pantograph. Part I: consistency of an electronic computerized pantograph to record articulator settings. J Prosthet Dent 1986 May;55(5):570-574.
  24. Comparison of condylar control settings using three methods: a bench study. J Prosthet Dent 1991 Aug;66(2):193-200.
  25. A study of the variability of setting a fully adjustable Gnathologic articulator to a pantographic tracing. J Prosthet Dent 1977 Apr;37(4):460-465.
  26. Potential errors when using a computerized pantograph. J Prosthet Dent 1989 Feb;61(2):155-160.
  27. Clinical evaluation of electronic pantograph with mechanical pantograph. J Dent Res 1983;62:200.
  28. Accuracy of recording horizontal condylar inclination and Bennett angle with the Cadiax Compact. J Oral Rehabil 2002 Nov;29(11):1076-1081.
  29. An in vitro evaluation of the reliability and validity of an electronic pantograph by testing with five different articulators. J Prosthet Dent 2004 Jul;92(1):83-89.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.