ArticleDental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology2026
Comparison of Shock Absorption Capacities of 3D-Printed Custom-Made Mouthguards: A Comparative In Vitro Study.
Article in Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- New Frontiers in Dental Traumatology: Innovation, Prevention, and Clinical Practice.Dental traumatology : official publication of International Association for Dental Traumatology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUNG/
aimNew resins for the additive manufacturing of mouthguards for contact sports are now available on the market. However, no study has evaluated the impact performance of these resins. The aim of this in vitro study was to compare the shock absorption capacities of custom-made mouthguards produced by additive manufacturing with those of thermoformed mouthguards. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree types of custom-made mouthguards were fabricated: 3D-printed Keyguard and Dima resin mouthguards and thermoformed triple-layer mouthguards. For each type of mouthguard, eight samples were produced. Each mouthguard was subjected to an impact performance test defined by the NF S72-427 standard for industrial mouthguards. Mean transmitted deceleration must not exceed 230 g (g = 9.81 m/s
resultsNone of the mouthguards met the impact absorption standard. Thermoformed mouthguards exhibited major structural failure after the first impact. For 3D-printed mouthguards, average peak deceleration ranged from 255 to 278 g for Dima and 292 to 299 g for Keyguard. Corresponding transmitted forces ranged from 2753 to 3106 N (Dima) and 3192 to 3292 N (Keyguard), with no significant difference between the two 3D-printed mouthguards (p > 0.05). Mean thickness decrease at the impact site was 0.2 mm for Dima mouthguards, 0.1 mm for Keyguard mouthguards, and 0.3 mm for thermoformed mouthguards.
conclusionAlthough none of the tested mouthguards met the NF S72-427 standard, 3D-printed custom devices demonstrated promising shock absorption performance after repeated impacts. These results highlight the potential of additive manufacturing as a cost-effective alternative to conventional thermoformed mouthguards, particularly for younger athletes requiring frequent replacements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.