• 대한치과의사협회지
• /
• 제52권12호
• /
• pp.734-743
• /
• 2014

Objectives: By introduced reciprocation motion file in dentistry, dentists benefit simple canal shaping procedure and time-saving. But, reciprocation motion generates uncomfortable vibration to doctors and patients. Because there was no study about this consideration, this study compared vibration pattern and power generated from reciprocation motion motor and conventional rotary motor. Materials & Methods: One conventional rotary motor; X-Smart (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland); and two reciprocating motors; WaveOne Motor (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland) and X-SMART PLUS (Dentsply Maillefer, Ballaigues, Switzerland); were used in this study. Triaxial $ICP^{(R)}$ Accelerometer (Model 356A12, PCB piezotronics, New York, USA) was attached on motor's handpiece head, and was measured tri-axial vibratory acceleration with NI Sound and Vibration Assistant 2009 software (National Instruments, Texas, USA). Mean vibratory acceleration and maximum vibratory acceleration was measured on fixed position and handed position. The results of vibratory acceleration were statistically analyzed using ANOVA and multiple comparisons are made using Turkey's test at p<0.05 level. Results: Reciprocating motors showed higher mean vibratory acceleration and maximum vibratory acceleration than conventional rotary motor (p<0.05). Between reciprocating motors, X-SMART PLUS had lower mean vibratory acceleration and maximum vibratory acceleration than WaveOne Motor (p<0.05). Conclusion: Reciprocating motors generate more vibration than conventional rotary motor. Further study about effect of vibration to dentist and patient is needed. And it seems to be necessary to make a standard about vibration level in endodontic motors.

• Restorative Dentistry and Endodontics
• /
• 제45권4호
• /
• pp.51.1-51.10
• /
• 2020

Objectives: No studies have yet assessed vibration characteristics according to endodontic file length. Accordingly, the objective of the present study was to examine the vibration characteristics according to nickel-titanium file length and to compare these characteristics between different file systems. Materials and Methods: A total of 45 root canal models were divided into 3 experimental groups (n = 15 each) based on the file system used (ProTaper Gold [PTG], ProTaper Next, or WaveOne Gold [WOG]). Each experimental group was further divided into 3 subgroups according to file length (21, 25, or 31 mm). An electric motor (X-SMART PLUS) was used in the experiment. For each file system, vibrations generated when using a size 25 file were measured and used to calculate the average vibration acceleration. The differences in vibrations were analyzed using 1-way analysis of variance and the Scheffé post hoc test with a confidence interval of 95%. Results: In the PTG file system, significantly lower vibration acceleration was observed when using a 21-mm file than when using a 31-mm file. In the WOG file system, significantly stronger vibration acceleration was observed when using a 31-mm file than when using 21- or 25-mm files. Regardless of the file length, the WOG group exhibited significantly stronger vibration acceleration than the other 2 experimental groups. Conclusions: In clinical practice, choosing a file with the shortest length possible could help reduce vibrations. Additionally, consideration should be given to vibrations that could be generated when using WOG files with reciprocating motion.