ArticleClinical oral investigations2025
Torsional resistance of additively, subtractively, and conventionally manufactured occlusal devices.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the torque load (TL) and angular rotation (AR) of additively, subtractively and conventionally manufactured occlusal devices. MATERIALS AND
methodsSpecimens (N = 120) were fabricated from four additive manufacturing resins (GR-10 guide, ProArt Print Splint clear, V-Print Splint, V-Print Splint comfort), five subtractively (BioniCut, EldyPlus, ProArt CAD Splint clear, Temp Premium Flexible, Thermeo) and one conventionally manufactured (Pro Base Cold) materials. The TL and AR were tested initially (24 h, 37 °C, H
resultsInitially, the mean TL values ranged from 63.7 to 104 Ncm for additively, 39.2 to 265 Ncm for subtractively, and 204 Ncm for conventionally manufactured materials. The initial mean AR values were 41.7 to 143 deg for additively, 38.4 to 138 deg for subtractively, and 29.3 deg for conventionally manufactured materials. After thermal cycling, the mean TL values ranged from 45.7 to 88.1 Ncm for additively, 31.2 to 246 Ncm for subtractively, and 138 Ncm for conventionally manufactured materials. The mean AR values after aging ranged from 19.9 to 124 deg for additively, 48.1 to 131 deg for subtractively, and 19.5 deg for conventionally manufactured materials.
conclusionsThe torsional resistance of additively, subtractively, and conventionally manufactured materials for occlusal devices varies and is affected by aging processes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Material selection for occlusal devices should be guided by the clinical needs of the patients.
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.