ArticlePeerJ2024
Evaluation of the forces applied by rubber dam clamps on mandibular first molar teeth with different endodontic access cavities: a 3D FEA study.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to examine the effect of the force applied by rubber dam clamps made from different materials on mandibular first molar teeth with various designs of endodontic access cavities using finite element analysis. Methods: A intact tooth (IT) and seven different endodontic access cavities namely, a traditional endodontic cavity (TRADAC), a guided endodontic cavity (GEC), a conservative endodontic cavity (CAC), an ultra-conservative access cavity (UAC), a truss access endodontic cavity (TRSAC), a mesial caries access cavity (MCAC), and a distal caries access cavity (DCAC), along with two different clamp finite element models, were created. The clamp models were made of polyether ether ketone (PEEK) and stainless steel (SS). The forces applied by the clamps were calculated based on the axial section distance of the tooth, and these forces were applied to the contact areas on the tooth. Stress distribution models were calculated using maximum von Mises (vM) stress. Results: The lowest vM stress under the forces applied by the SS and PEEK clamps was found in the IT model (80.914 MPa) with the PEEK clamp. The highest vM stress was found in the DCAC model (759.49 MPa) applied with the SS clamp. The forces applied by SS clamps resulted in higher vM stress values in every cavity design than those applied by PEEK clamps. Conclusion: PEEK clamps generated less force than SS clamps. However, clinicians should follow various isolation strategies (clamp made of different materials, split dam,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.