• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.38 no.2
• /
• pp.81-89
• /
• 2022

Purpose: Wireless endodontic handpieces (WEH) are widely used in dental clinics due to their convenience and portability. This study aimed to compare the vibration magnitudes and patterns generated by five WEH. Materials and Methods: Vibration acceleration of five WEH (X-Smart IQ, E connect S, Endo A Class, ENDOIT, and TRAUS ENDO) in the rotary and reciprocating motion was measured with accelerometer The average vibration acceleration was analyzed using the t-test, Welch's ANOVA test, and Dunnett T3 test at P < 0.05. Results: In all WEH, the average vibration acceleration in reciprocating motion was significantly higher than that in rotary motion (P < 0.001). In rotary motion, repeated vibration graphs of constant amplitude were obtained without sudden changes in the magnitude of vibration, and the average vibration acceleration value was high in the order of X Smart IQ, Endo A Class, ENDOIT, E Connect S, and TRAUS ENDO (P < 0.001), there was no statistically significant difference between X Smart IQ and Endo A Class. In reciprocating motion, a vibration graph was obtained in which large amplitude peaks appear at specific points within one cycle are repeated. The average vibration acceleration value was highest in the order of X Smart IQ, E Connect S, Endo A class, ENDOIT, and TRAUS ENDO (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Regardless of the type of WEH, greater vibration occurred in the reciprocating motion than in the rotary motion (P < 0.001). In the reciprocating motion, there was a difference in vibration for all handpieces (P < 0.001).

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.91-97
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study was to evaluate RPM maintenance in X-Smart according to the power supplied by the AC adapter and rechargeable battery. Five new X-Smart were used in this study. A handpiece with rubber disk which has reflective tape was mounted on the vice. To measure the RPM, a non-contact type digital tachometer was used. RPM measurements were recorded every 5 minutes to 180 minutes and repeated 3 times per motor from each power source. To evaluate a difference of the RPM changes, two-way repeated measures were performed using $SPSS^{TM}$ 14.0. All tests were conducted at the 95 percent confidence level. There was no significant difference in the RPM change between the power sources. Continuous use of X-Smart with a rechargeable battery for up to 180 minutes could be safely used as an endodontic wireless motor with a reliable RPM maintenance.