CLINICAL RESEARCH

Evaluation of eccentric tooth contact on a semi-adjustable

articulator by using an occlusal analysis system
Min-Young Jeong, DDS, MS, PhD,a Myung-Joo Kim, DDS, MS, PhD,b Young-Jun Lim, DDS, MS, PhD,c and
Ho-Beom Kwon, DDS, MS, PhDd

Articulators are used for precise ABSTRACT

diagnosis and accurate dental
restorations.1 Clinicians use
semi-adjustable articulators to
simulate patient mandibular
movement and occlusal re-
lationships,2-5 which aids
prosthesis fabrication by trans-
ferring occlusal adjustments to
the articulator, thus requiring
fewer intraoral occlusal adjust-
ments.5-7 However, a semi-
adjustable articulator cannot
accurately duplicate mandib-
ular movement.8-13 Because of
the straight line movement and
the inability to adjust for im-
mediate side shift or the dis-
tance of the superior wall,
posterior wall, and inter-
condylar width, eccentric
movements are not well simu-
lated by semi-adjustable artic-
ulators.8,11 Because a semi-
adjustable articulator does not
accurately reproduce mandib-
ular movement, prostheses
made by using the semi-
adjustable articulator are likely
to show occlusal errors.9,14-17
Statement of problem. Duplicating mandibular movement with a semi-adjustable articulator has
been reported to lack accuracy. However, although previous studies have analyzed articulator
movement, few have compared excursive tooth contact on the articulator with tooth contact
during actual mandibular movement.
Purpose. The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the concordance of semi-adjustable
articulator contacts with intraoral contacts during eccentric movements by using a T-scan
occlusal analysis system.
Material and methods. Forty-two participants with normal occlusion and without signs of
temporomandibular disorder were analyzed for the reproducibility of eccentric tooth contact on
a semi-adjustable articulator. Maxillary casts made from irreversible hydrocolloid impressions
were mounted on a semi-adjustable articulator with the facebow. The condylar inclination of the
articulator was set by using interocclusal records. Three recordings of right and left excursive
mandibular movement and protrusive mandibular movement were made in the supine position
by using the T-scan v9.1. The same procedure was then performed with the articulator. The
results of complete mandibular movement from T-scan measurements were divided into 4 time
points for analysis: T0, T1, T2, and T3. The concordance of intraoral and articulator occlusal
contacts was evaluated at each point, and the occlusal force for each tooth was compared.
Overall concordance and concordance of the working and nonworking sides were also
calculated. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to analyze differences between the
concordance of intraoral and articulator contacts according to mandibular movement direction,
time, and working and nonworking sides (a=.01).
Results. For all teeth, concordance between the intraoral and articulator occlusal contacts during
excursive mandibular movement was greatest at T0, decreasing at T1 and T2, and increasing at
T3. No significant differences were found in the concordance among the right lateral, left lateral,
and protrusive excursion (P>.01). The concordance of working side occlusal contacts during
lateral excursion was significantly lower at T3 than that at T0 (P<.01).
Conclusions. When comparing intraoral and articulator contacts during lateral eccentric
mandibular movement, concordance was affected by time and working or nonworking side.
Reproducibility of initial eccentric tooth contact on a semi-adjustable articulator appeared to be
reliable. However, occlusal adjustment of the working side might be required after prosthesis
delivery. (J Prosthet Dent 2024;131:34-41)

Supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2018R1D1A1A02043173).
a
Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
b
Professor, Dental Research Institute and Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
c
Professor, Dental Research Institute and Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
d
Professor, Dental Research Institute and Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

34 THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY

January 2024
Clinical Implications
This clinical study demonstrated the reliable
reproducibility of initial eccentric tooth contact on a
semi-adjustable articulator and accurate
nonworking-side simulation. Despite some
limitations, the semi-adjustable articulator is
clinically useful when the user understands
mandibular movement and the articulator
movement.
Hobo et al10 classified articulator-related occlusal errors
as positive or negative. Positive errors occur when the
articulator undercompensates for mandibular move-
ment, and negative errors occur when the articulator
overcompensates for mandibular movement. Adjust-
ment for positive errors is recommended because
occlusal interference could induce temporomandibular
disorders.18-20
Few studies have evaluated the ability of articulators
to reproduce excursive tooth contact during mandibular
movement. Tamaki et al21 analyzed the reproduction of
excursive tooth contact by an articulator by using
computerized axiography and reported that the articu-
lator reproduced 82% of the protrusive tooth contacts
and 90% of the laterotrusive tooth contacts. Caro et al4
assessed lateral excursive tooth contacts produced by
using a semi-adjustable articulator and articulating paper
and reported that it reproduced 82% of intraoral contacts
with canine guidance, 40% with anterior guidance, and
0% with group function.
Previous studies used wax or articulating paper to
indicate excursive occlusal contacts.4,21 However, results
from studies using these methods have been shown to be
unreliable,22-25 often including false positives and sub-
jective interpretation of articulating paper marks.26-28
Possible alterations in the temporomandibular joint and
tooth positions might have been caused by wax resistance,
resulting in inaccurate tooth contact recordings.29-35
Furthermore, contact marks from articulating paper or
wax can only show the location of contacts and cannot
indicate occlusal force or changes in occlusal contact.36-39
The T-scan (Tekscan, Inc) is a computerized occlusal
analysis system developed by Maness et al40 that dem-
onstrates not only static occlusion similar to conventional
occlusal indicating methods but also dynamic occlusion,
including timing and force in real-time display.41-45 The
T-scan system consists of an intraoral sensor film, a
computer-connected handpiece, and a software pro-
gram.46 The sensor foil is about 100 mm thick.47-49 The
T-scan system has been reported to be precise and reliable
and is a rapid method for recording occlusal
contacts.42,43,50
Jeong et al
35
The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the
concordance between semi-adjustable articulator contact
and intraoral contact during eccentric movement by us-
ing an occlusal analysis system. The null hypotheses were
that concordance for all teeth would not change over
time, tested by comparing intraoral contact with articu-
lator contact during mandibular lateral eccentric move-
ment, and that concordance of the working side would
not be different from that of the nonworking side.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
The reproducibility on a semi-adjustable articulator of the
eccentric tooth contacts of 42 participants was evaluated
by comparing the concordance between semi-adjustable
articulator contact and intraoral contact during eccentric
movement by using an occlusal analysis system (T-scan;
Tekscan, Inc). The concordance was analyzed at 4 time
points during eccentric movement by comparing occlusal
contact points.
The participants were selected from patients from the
Department of Prosthodontics at Seoul National Uni-
versity Dental Hospital and were chosen according to
inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 1). Approval from
the Institutional Review Board of the School of Dentistry
at Seoul National University (S-D20170046) was ob-
tained for this study. Informed consent was obtained
from all participants.
Irreversible hydrocolloid (Aroma Fine Plus Normal
set; GC) impressions of maxillary and mandibular arches
were poured in dental stone (Snow Rock dental stone;
DK MUNGYO Corp). Before mounting, the maxillary
cast was scanned with a model scanner (T-300; Medit
Corp) and then mounted with plaster (Snow Rock dental
plaster; DK MUNGYO Corp) in an arcon-type semi-
adjustable articulator (PROTAR Evo 7; KaVo Dental
GmbH) by using a facebow (ARCUS; KaVo Dental
GmbH) with the orbitale as the third reference point.51
The mandibular cast was hand-articulated to the maxil-
lary cast, fixed with a metal rod and sticky wax, and
mounted to the articulator with the 2-step plaster
technique.52,53
The condylar inclination was set by using each par-
ticipant’s protrusive interocclusal record according to the
manufacturer’s instructions.54 Before making inter-
occlusal records, participants were instructed to protrude
their mandible to determine the edge-to-edge relation-
ship of the incisors.14,55 Immediate side shift was set as
0 mm. The Bennett angle was adjusted by using lateral
interocclusal records.54 For laterotrusive records, the
participants were trained to position the mandible to
determine the cusp tip-to-cusp tip relationship of the
canines in both right and left lateral excursion.14,55 The
interocclusal record from maximum intercuspation (MIP)
was also made to use as a reference for positioning the
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
36
Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion Criteria Exclusion Criteria
Free of signs and symptoms of Missing teeth (except third molars
temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and premolars for orthodontics)
including muscle tenderness to palpation,
pain on mandibular movement, joint
sounds, and temporomandibular joint
tender to palpation
Intact complete dentition Severe crowding
Angle class I molar relationships Currently undergoing orthodontic
treatment
Positive horizontal overlap and vertical
overlap (2 to 4 mm)
Absence of reverse articulation
Absence of tooth mobility or fremitus
Absence of deviation from anterior
disclusion
standard tessellation language (STL) file of the cast in the
software program of the occlusal analysis system. Pro-
trusive and lateral interocclusal records and MIP inter-
occlusal records were made for all participants with a
polyvinyl siloxane material (O-bite; DMG). The recording
material was selected considering minimal resistance
during the intercuspation phase and dimensional stabil-
ity after setting.56-59 After setting the sagittal and lateral
condylar inclinations, eccentric mandibular movements
on the articulator were recorded by using the occlusal
analysis system.
The participants were seated in a dental chair, and the
average width of 2 maxillary central incisors was
measured. Missing teeth were noted, and the measure-
ment was input to the occlusal analysis system to
customize the arch size. The occlusal analysis system
automatically determined the average value for tooth
width. After determining the arch size, the position guide
of the sensor support was placed between the central
incisors, and the handle was kept as parallel to the
occlusal plane as possible. Before making measurements,
a pretest was conducted by asking the participants to
close their jaw 3 times, and sensitivity was adjusted until
1 to 3 pink sensor elements were shown, based on the
manufacturer’s recommendations. Each recording
included eccentric movement in 1 direction. Recordings
of right, left, and protrusive mandibular movement were
conducted 3 times each. The same procedure was per-
formed with the articulator.
To analyze contacts for each tooth, the STL files of the
maxillary cast were aligned with the arch for each
participant by using the software program of the occlusal
analysis system. The interocclusal record from maximum
intercuspation was used as a reference for positioning the
STL file. After positioning the STL file, the arch was
divided into individual teeth. The occlusal analysis sys-
tem depicted occlusal force changes over time as a graph,
and the force graph was marked with 4 vertical lines
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
Volume 131 Issue 1
denoted as A, B, C, and D. A to B indicates occlusion
time, and C to D indicates disclusion time. According to
the manufacturer’s protocols, occlusion time is defined as
the time elapsed from the initial tooth contact until the
final tooth contact, and disclusion time is defined as the
time elapsed since the beginning of a jaw movement
made in 1 direction until only the canine or incisors are in
contact.41 Because the T-scan defines the D line based on
anterior guidance, the D line was adjusted by the
d
examiner to the point when the nonworking side was
d completely separated. As this study was focused on
d evaluating eccentric mandibular movements, the C line
d was defined as T0. The time point halfway between C
and D was considered T1; three-quarters of the way
between C and D was considered T2; and the D line was
defined as T3 (Fig. 1). At each time point, the relative
occlusal force of each tooth was recorded.
Relative occlusal force measurements by the occlusal
analysis system were repeated 3 times and averaged. Any
occlusal force data point detected was assumed to indi-
cate the presence of occlusal contact on each tooth, and
the tooth was scored as “1.” Otherwise, it was scored as
“0.” The concordance of intraoral occlusal contacts and
articulator occlusal contacts was calculated by comparing
the presence of occlusal contacts for each participant at
T0, T1, T2, and T3. The concordance of all teeth, teeth on
the working side, teeth on the nonworking side, anterior
teeth, and posterior teeth was calculated. Differences in
concordance between contacts on the semi-adjustable
articulator and intraoral contacts were analyzed accord-
ing to mandibular movement direction and time. The
discrepancies between intraoral and articulator contacts
on the working and nonworking sides were sorted into 2
categories: positive occlusal error and negative occlusal
error.10
Paired t tests were used to examine differences be-
tween left and right sagittal and lateral condylar in-
clinations. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were
used to evaluate the reproducibility of repeated tests.60
Repeated measures analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA)
was used to analyze factors affecting concordance be-
tween intraoral and articulator contacts (a=.01). After
RM-ANOVA, Bonferroni post hoc tests were used to
examine statistically significant differences (a=.01).
RESULTS
The mean sagittal condylar inclination of 42 participants
obtained by the interocclusal record was 48.3 degrees for
the right side and 48.6 degrees for the left side. The
mean Bennett angle was 5.3 degrees for the right side
and 6.7 degrees for the left side (Table 2). No significant
differences in sagittal condylar inclination and Bennett
angle were found between the right and left sides
(P>.01).
Jeong et al
January 2024 37

100.0
A B C D
% Max Total Force
80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0
0.0 0.8 1.6 2.4

T0 T1 T2 T3
Figure 1. Occlusal force changes over time: T0 represents beginning of jaw movement made in one direction, and T3 time point when teeth on
nonworking side for right and left excursion and posterior teeth for protrusion completely separated. Time point halfway between T0 and T3 defined as
T1, and time point three-quarters between T0 and T3 defined as T2.

Table 2. Mean horizontal and lateral condylar inclinations (degrees) Table 3. Concordance (%) between intraoral and articulator occlusal
Standard contacts of all teeth during excursive movements
Condylar Inclination Average Deviation P Value All Teeth Right Left Protrusion
Horizontal condylar inclination Right 48.3 9.9 .815 T0 91.1 ±7.8 91.4 ±9.6 91.0 ±9.7
Left 48.6 9.7 T1 77.8 ±14.6 78.3 ±10.5 78.0 ±15.4
Lateral condylar inclination Right 5.3 2.4 .739 T2 71.6 ±13.1 72.9 ±13.5 66.5 ±13.6
(Bennett angle)
Left 6.7 5.1 T3 82.3 ±13.1 86.1 ±9.9 85.0 ±11.5

were divided into 2 categories: positive occlusal error and

For all teeth, concordance between intraoral occlusal
contacts and articulator contacts during excursive
mandibular movement was highest at T0, decreasing at
T1 and T2, and increasing slightly at T3 (Table 3, Fig. 2).
No statistically significant differences were found in the
concordance of the right lateral, left lateral, and protru-
sive excursion (P>.01). However, there were significant
differences among concordance values regarding the
timelines of excursive movement (P<.01, Table 4). The
concordance of the right, left, and protrusive excursion at
T0 was higher than that at T3; however, these differences
were significant only during right excursion (Bonferroni
adjusted P<.01).
When comparing the working and nonworking sides
of lateral excursion, the concordance between intraoral
occlusal contacts and articulator contacts during excur-
sive mandibular movement on the working side was
similar to that at T0 on the nonworking side (Bonferroni
adjusted P>.01). The concordance on the nonworking
side was significantly higher than the working-side
concordance at T3 (For the right and left excursion,
Bonferroni adjusted P<.01; Tables 5 and 6, Fig. 3).
Posterior teeth showed significantly higher concordance
than anterior teeth during protrusive excursion at T0
and T3 (Bonferroni adjusted P<.01; Tables 5 and 6,
Fig. 3).
Discrepancies in working side concordance at T3 were
33.5% for right excursion and 23.7% for left excursion.
Discrepancies between intraoral and articulator contacts
negative occlusal error (Table 7). Fewer discrepancies
were found for nonworking side measurements than for
working side measurements.
The reproducibility of the thrice-repeated tests for
mandibular eccentric movement made by the occlusal
analysis system is shown in Table 8. ICC values between
0.5 and 0.75 indicated moderate reliability; 0.75 and 0.9
indicated good reliability; and 0.9 and higher indicated
excellent reliability.58 All ICC values for eccentric move-
ments measured by the T-scan yielded better than
moderate reliability. ICC values at T0 and T3 yielded
better than good reliability.
DISCUSSION
Concordance between intraoral occlusal contact and
articulator occlusal contact varied significantly over time,
indicating that concordance changed during excursive
mandibular movements. Therefore, the null hypothesis
that concordance for all teeth would not change over
time was rejected. Concordance of the nonworking side
(right and left excursion) and posterior teeth (protrusive
excursion) were significantly higher than those of the
working side (right and left excursion) and anterior teeth
(protrusive excursion) at T3. This indicated higher
reproducibility on the nonworking side, and therefore,
the null hypothesis that concordance of the working side
would not be different from that of the nonworking side
was rejected.

Jeong et al THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY

38 Volume 131 Issue 1

Right Excursion Left Excursion Protrusion

*
* * *
* * *
1.0 1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8 0.8

Concordance

Concordance
Concordance
0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0 0.0

T0 T1 T2 T3 T0 T1 T2 T3 T0 T1 T2 T3
Time Time Time
All teeth A All teeth B All teeth C
Figure 2. Concordance between intraoral and articulator occlusal contacts of all teeth. A, Right excursion. B, Left excursion. C, Protrusive excursion.
*Significantly different groups, P.01.

Table 4. Statistical differences in concordance between intraoral and Table 5. Concordance (%) between intraoral and articulator occlusal
articulator occlusal contacts according to mandibular movement contacts of working side and nonworking side teeth during excursive
direction and time by using 2-way RM-ANOVA (a=.01) movements
Factor P Right Left Protrusion
Time <.001 Time Working Nonworking Working Nonworking Anterior Posterior
Left/Right/Protrusion .313 T0 91.1 ±9.7 91.1 ±10.9 91.2 ±11.1 91.6 ±12.1 83.3 ±19.5 96.4 ±8.8
Time×Left/Right/Protrusion .322 T1 81.8 ±16.6 73.8 ±20.1 83.6 ±14.4 73.2 ±19.2 72.0 ±24.0 82.1 ±17.0
T2 75.7 ±18.8 67.4 ±18.7 77.1 ±16.8 68.8 ±20.3 72.8 ±19.0 61.5 ±16.0
T3 67.5 ±24.8 96.6 ±6.8 76.3 ±18.1 95.8 ±8.5 73.6 ±23.0 92.8 ±9.3

Using the T-scan, concordance was found to be

significantly higher at T0 than that at T3 on the working
side during right and left excursion; that is, an articulator
could precisely simulate movement of the working side
immediately after lateral excursion. However, at T3,
concordance discrepancies were found for the working
side (33.5% for the right and 23.7% for the left excursion)
and anterior teeth (27.78% for protrusive excursion).
Among the concordance discrepancies between intraoral
contacts and articulator contacts, the mean positive
occlusal error of the working side (right and left excur-
sion) and anterior teeth (protrusive excursion) was
18.10% on the right, 15.49% on the left, and 14.62% on
protrusive excursion. Consequently, occlusal adjustment
of the working side may be necessary after prosthesis
delivery. This limitation might have arisen from the linear
structure of the condylar guidance structure of the semi-
adjustable articulator. Although the Bennett angle was
set by the laterotrusive record, Bennett movement was
reproduced as only linear movement. Moreover, the
immediate side shift, the superior wall, the posterior wall,
and the intercondylar distance could not be adjusted
precisely on the semi-adjustable articulator. These
structural limitations of the semi-adjustable articulator
might have caused significantly lower concordance for
the working side during lateral excursive move-
ment.8,10,11,13 Meanwhile, the semi-adjustable articulator
could reproduce nonworking-side contacts more pre-
cisely in relation to the working side. Among concor-
dance discrepancies in the nonworking side (right and
left excursion) and posterior teeth (protrusive excursion),
the mean positive occlusal error was 2.75% on the right,
2.79% on the left, and 3.78% on protrusive excursion.
However, the possibility of additional occlusal adjust-
ment of the nonworking side after prosthesis delivery
might be concerning because an occlusal interference on
the nonworking side might increase the risk for tempo-
romandibular disorders.18-20 With the Frankfort plane as
the reference plane, the mean sagittal condylar inclina-
tion in this study was 48.3 degrees on the right and 48.6
degrees on the left, similar to a previous study.51 The
reproducibility of thrice-repeated tests of mandibular
eccentric movement by using the occlusal analysis sys-
tem was good or excellent at T0 and at T3. ICC values
were lower on the articulator than on the mandible for
most recordings. Because an articulator is an instrument
with joints, its movement can vary with the applied
force. Accordingly, clinicians and dental laboratory
technicians should be careful when operating
articulators.
In this study, the mean concordance for all teeth at T3
was 82.3% on the right, 86.1% on the left, and 85.0% on
protrusive excursion, similar to the values of Tamaki
et al21 but higher than the values reported by Caro et al.4
Similar results from the present study and the study by
Tamaki et al might be because of the dimensional sta-
bility and rigidity of polyvinyl siloxane as an interocclusal
recording material.21 In the study by Caro et al,4 only 17

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY Jeong et al

January 2024 39

Right Excursion
Left Excursion
*
* * Protrusion
* *
* * *
* * *
* * * * *
1.0
1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

Concordance
Concordance

Concordance
0.8

0.6 0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0 0.0

T0 T1 T2 T3 T0 T1 T2 T3 T0 T1 T2 T3
Time Time Time

Working Balancing A Working Balancing B Anterior teeth Posterior teeth C

Figure 3. Concordance between intraoral and articulator occlusal contacts of working side and nonworking side. A, Right excursion. B, Left excursion.
C, Protrusive excursion. *Significantly different groups, P.01.

Table 6. Statistical differences in concordance between intraoral and

participants were included, and only the first 2 mm of articulator occlusal contacts according to mandibular movement
mandible gliding movement to the right and left direction, time, and working and nonworking side by using 3-way RM-
(equivalent to T1 or T2) was measured, whereas the ANOVA (a=.01)
maximum mandibular excursions of 42 participants were Factor P
measured in the present study. Both Tamaki et al21 and Time <.001
Caro et al4 used 40-mm articulating paper as the occlusal Working/Nonworking .001
indicator and wax as the protrusive interocclusal Left/Right/Protrusion .154
recording material. False-positive marks are often Time×Working/Nonworking <.001
observed on articulating paper, and saliva can affect Time×Left/Right/Protrusion .649
contact marking.22-25,28 Wax has been reported to be one Working/Nonworking×Left/Right/Protrusion .059
of the most inaccurate interocclusal record materials Time×Working/Nonworking×Left/Right/Protrusion .001

because of its high thermal expansion coefficient and

high resistance during occlusion.29-35 In the present
normal occlusion. Differences might exist for individuals
study, polyvinyl siloxane was used as the interocclusal
with malocclusion. Furthermore, interocclusal records
recording material because of its minimal resistance
were used to determine condylar inclination, but this
during the intercuspation phase, its dimensional stabil-
ity, and its rigidity after setting.54-57 The occlusal anal- method has been found to be neither accurate nor
reproducible in previous studies.14-17 However, inter-
ysis system was used as an occlusal indicator, as it has
occlusal records are still used to determine condylar
been reported to be precise and reliable for recording
inclination because it is a straightforward approach and
occlusal contacts and shows not only static occlusion but
is available without the need for special equipment.
also the transition of occlusal force and contact over
Further studies using extraoral devices such as comput-
time.42,43,50
erized pantographs to determine the condylar inclination
The occlusal analysis system has limitations. Da Silva
are needed to evaluate the semi-adjustable articulator
et al49 reported that the surface of the sensor film does
not always show uniform sensitivity. Also, the direction more accurately.
of the mandible can be shifted by the sensor film upon
closing, causing occlusal contact force and occlusal con- CONCLUSIONS
tact points to be inaccurately detected.47,48 Furthermore,
Based on the findings of this clinical study, the following
Jeong et al50 reported that some regions of the sensor
conclusions were drawn:
films can malfunction, which was confirmed by regions
showing a positive signal even though no force was 1. Assessment between semi-adjustable articulator
applied. This phenomenon was also observed in the contact and intraoral contact during eccentric
present study. This error could have occurred because of movement when using a T-scan for sound complete
a manufacturing error or tearing of the sensor film dur- dentition with normal occlusion revealed that
ing excursion. In addition, the present study was con- concordance between the 2 measurement ap-
ducted on participants with a complete dentition and proaches changed over time.

Jeong et al THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY

40 Volume 131 Issue 1

Table 7. Rate (%) of positive and negative occlusal errors at T3 for excursive movement
Right Left Protrusion
Occlusal Error Working Nonworking Working Nonworking Anterior Posterior
Positive error 22.02 (67.7)* 2.75 (80) 11.50 (48.5) 2.79 (66.7) 10.81 (40.9) 3.78 (52.3)
Negative error 10.48 (32.3) 0.65 (20) 12.20 (51.5) 1.41 (33.3) 15.59 (59.1) 3.42 (47.7)
Total occlusal error 33.50 (100) 3.40 (100) 23.70 (100) 4.20 (100) 27.78 (100) 7.20 (100)
*Values in parentheses indicate total discrepancy.

Table 8. Intraclass correlation coefficients of repeated excursive 14. Pelletier LB, Campbell SD. Comparison of condylar control settings using
three methods: a bench study. J Prosthet Dent 1991;66:193-200.
movements by using T-scan
15. Posselt UP, Skytting B. Registration of the condyle path inclination: variations
Left Right Protrusive using the Gysi technique. J Prosthet Dent 1960;10:243-7.
Direction of
Time Excursion ICC SD ICC SD ICC SD 16. Gross M, Nemcovsky C, Friedlander LD. Comparative study of condylar
settings of three semi-adjustable articulators. Int J Prosthodont 1990;3:
T0 Mandible 0.960 0.001 0.950 0.001 0.956 0.002 135-41.
Articulator 0.874 0.003 0.884 0.001 0.763 0.006 17. Gross M, Nemcovsky C, Tabibian Y, Gazit E. The effect of three different
recording materials on the reproducibility of condylar guidance registrations
T1 Mandible 0.850 0.006 0.821 0.006 0.752 0.006 in three semi-adjustable articulators. J Oral Rehabil 1998;25:204-8.
Articulator 0.669 0.018 0.730 0.010 0.648 0.012 18. Ciancaglini R, Gherlone EF, Redaelli S, Radaelli G. The distribution of
T2 Mandible 0.769 0.014 0.827 0.007 0.616 0.019 occlusal contacts in the intercuspal position and temporomandibular disor-
der. J Oral Rehabil 2002;29:1082-90.
Articulator 0.769 0.014 0.780 0.021 0.624 0.017 19. Haralur SB, Addas MK, Othman HI, Shah FK, El-Malki AI, Al-Qahtani MA.
T3 Mandible 0.820 0.017 0.827 0.007 0.814 0.016 Prevalence of malocclusion, its association with occlusal interferences and
temporomandibular disorders among the Saudi sub-population. Oral Health
Articulator 0.899 0.011 0.780 0.021 0.784 0.014 Dent Manag 2014;13:164-9.
ICC, intraclass correlation coefficients; SD, standard deviation.
20. Le Bell Y, Niemi PM, Jämsä T, Kylmälä M, Alanen P. Subjective re-
actions to intervention with artificial interferences in subjects with and
without a history of temporomandibular disorders. Acta Odontol Scand
2006;64:59-63.
21. Tamaki K, Celar AG, Beyrer S, Aoki H. Reproduction of excursive tooth
2. The reproducibility of initial eccentric tooth contact contact in an articulator with computerized axiography data. J Prosthet Dent
on a semi-adjustable articulator appeared to be 1997;78:373-8.
22. Kerstein RB, Radke J. Clinician accuracy when subjectively interpreting
reliable. articulating paper markings. Cranio 2014;32:13-23.
3. A semi-adjustable articulator simulated the 23. Millstein P, Maya A. An evaluation of occlusal contact marking indicators: a
descriptive quantitative method. J Am Dent Assoc 2001;132:1280-6.
nonworking side (for lateral excursion) and posterior 24. Halperin GC, Halperin AR, Norling BK. Thickness, strength, and plastic
teeth (for protrusive excursion) accurately. However, deformation of occlusal registration strips. J Prosthet Dent 1982;48:575-8.
25. Gazit E, Fitzig S, Lieberman MA. Reproducibility of occlusal marking tech-
the working side might require occlusal adjustments niques. J Prosthet Dent 1986;55:505-9.
after prosthesis delivery. 26. Carossa S, Lojacono A, Schierano G, Pera P. Evaluation of occlusal contacts
in the dental laboratory: influence of strip thickness and operator experience.
Int J Prosthodont 2000;13:201-4.
27. Millstein P. Know your indicator. J Mass Dent Soc 2008;56:30-1.
REFERENCES 28. Saracoglu A, Ozpinar B. In vivo and in vitro evaluation of occlusal indicator
sensitivity. J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:522-6.
1. Mohamed SE, Schmidt JR, Harrison JD. Articulators in dental education and 29. Mullick SC, Stackhouse JA Jr, Vincent GR. A study of interocclusal records
practice. J Prosthet Dent 1976;36:319-25. materials. J Prosthet Dent 1981;46:304-7.
2. Donegan SJ, Christensen LV. Sagittal condylar guidance as determined 30. Fattore L, Malone WF, Sandrik JL, Mazur B, Hart T. Clinical evaluation of the
by protrusion records and wear facets of teeth. J Prosthet Dent 1991;4: accuracy of interocclusal recording materials. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:152-7.
469-72. 31. Millstein PL, Kronman JH, Clark RE. Determination of the accuracy of wax
3. Celenza FV. An analysis of articulators. Dent Clin North Am 1979;23:305-26. interocclusal registrations. J Prosthet Dent 1971;25:189-96.
4. Caro AJ, Peraire M, Martinez-Gomis J, Anglada JM, Samso J. Reproducibility 32. Millstein PL, Clark RE, Kronman JH. Determination of the accuracy of wax
of lateral excursive tooth contact in a semi-adjustable articulator depending interocclusal registrations. Part II. J Prosthet Dent 1973;29:40-5.
on the type of lateral guidance. J Oral Rehabil 2005;32:174-9. 33. Millstein PL, Clark RE. Determination of the accuracy of laminated wax
5. Dos Santos J Jr, Nelson S, Nowlin T. Comparison of condylar guidance interocclusal wafers. J Prosthet Dent 1983;50:327-31.
setting obtained from a wax record versus an extraoral tracing: a pilot study. 34. Millstein PL. An evaluation of occlusal indicator wax. J Prosthet Dent
J Prosthet Dent 2003;89:54-9. 1985;53:570-2.
6. Bailey JO, Nowlin TP. Evaluation of the third point of reference for mounting 35. Lassila V. Comparison of five interocclusal recording materials. J Prosthet
maxillary casts on the Hanau articulator. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:199-201. Dent 1986;55:215-8.
7. Weinberg LA. An evaluation of basic articulators and their concepts: part II. 36. Kerstein RB. Articulating paper mark misconceptions and computerized
Arbitrary, positional, semi-adjustable articulators. J Prosthet Dent 1963;13: occlusal analysis technology. Dent Implantol Update 2008;19:41-6.
645-63. 37. Qadeer S, Kerstein RB, Kim RJ, Huh JB, Shin SW. Relationship between
8. Shanahan TEJ, Leff A. Mandibular and articulator movements. J Prosthet articulation paper mark size and percentage of force measured with
Dent 1959;9:941-5. computerized occlusal analysis. J Adv Prosthodont 2012;4:7-12.
9. Clayton JA. Border positions and restoring occlusion. Dent Clin North Am 38. Carey JP, Craig M, Kerstein RB, Radke J. Determining a relationship between
1971;15:525-42. applied occlusal load and articulating paper mark area. Open Dent J 2007;1:
10. Hobo S, Shillingburg HT Jr, Whitsett LD. Articulator selection for restorative 1-7.
dentistry. J Prosthet Dent 1976;36:35-43. 39. Saad MN, Weiner G, Ehrenberg D, Weiner S. Effects of load and indicator
11. Watchel HC, Curtis DA. Limitations of semi-adjustable articulators Part I: type upon occlusal contact markings. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater
straight line articulators without setting for immediate side shift. J Prosthet 2008;85:18-22.
Dent 1987;58:438-42. 40. Maness WL, Benjamin M, Podoloff R, Bobick A, Golden RF. Computerized
12. Chou TM, Pameijer CH. An investigation of the reproducibility of articulators. occlusal analysis: a new technology. Quintessence Int 1987;18:287-92.
J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:442-8. 41. Kerstein RB. Handbook of research on computerized occlusal analysis
13. Dos Santos Junior J, Ash MMJ. A comparison of the equivalence of jaw and technology applications in dental medicine. Hershey: IGI global; 2015. p.
articulator movements. J Prosthet Dent 1988;59:36-42. 12-8.

THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY Jeong et al

January 2024
42. Koos B, Godt A, Schille C, Goz G. Precision of an instrumentation-based
method of analyzing occlusion and its resulting distribution of forces in the
dental arch. J Orofac Orthop 2010;71:403-10.
43. Stern K, Kordaß B. Comparison of the Greifswald Digital Analyzing System
with the T-Scan III with respect to clinical reproducibility for displaying
occlusal contacts. J Cranio Mandib Func 2010;2:107-19.
44. Kerstein RB, Lowe M, Harty M, Radke J. A force reproduction analysis of
two recording sensors of a computerized occlusal analysis system. Cranio
2006;24:15-24.
45. Bozhkova TP. The T-Scan system in evaluating occlusal contacts. Folia Med
2016;58:122-30.
46. Cerna M, Ferreira R, Zaror C, Navarro P, Sandoval P. In vitro evaluation of T-
Scan III through study of the sensels. Cranio 2015;33:299-305.
47. Beninati CJ, Katona TR. The combined effects of salivas and occlusal in-
dicators on occlusal contact forces. J Oral Rehabil 2019;46:468-74.
48. Mitchem JA, Katona TR, Moser EAS. Does the presence of an occlusal in-
dicator product affect the contact forces between full dentitions? J Oral
Rehabil 2017;44:791-9.
49. Da Silva M, Caramelo F, Ramalho J, Gomes P. In vitro study on the sensibility
and reproducibility of the new T-Scan III HD system. Rev Port Estomatol Cir
Maxilofac 2014;55:14-22.
50. Jeong MY, Lim YJ, Kim MJ, Kwon HB. Comparison of two computerized
occlusal analysis systems for indicating occlusal contacts. J Adv Prosthodont
2020;12:49-54.
51. Olsson A, Posselt U. Relationship of various skull reference lines. J Prosthet
Dent 1961;11:1045-9.
52. Gregory WA, Kaplan MD. A comparison of the accuracy of two articulating
methods: the double-arch impression technique vs. hand-articulated full-
arch casts. Quintessence Int 1988;19:631-4.
53. Rosenstiel SF, Land MF, Walters RD. Contemporary fixed prosthodontics.
6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Inc; 2023. p. 66.
54. Kavo PROTAR evo manual. Available at: https://embed.widencdn.net/download/
kavokerr/tkfzcl3jdj/GA_Z0922-PROTARevo-3_20160729_01_en.pdf?u=a0aubk.
Accessed July 29, 2016.
Jeong et al
41
55. Ecker GA, Goodacre CJ, Dykema RW. A comparison of condylar control
settings obtained from wax interocclusal records and simplified mandibular
motion analyzers. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51:404-6.
56. Campos AA, Nathanson D. Compressibility of two polyvinyl siloxane inter-
occlusal record materials and its effect on mounted cast relationships.
J Prosthet Dent 1999;82:456-61.
57. Chee WW, Donovan TE. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: a review of
properties and techniques. J Prosthet Dent 1992;68:728-32.
58. Mandikos MN. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: an update on clinical
use. Aust Dent J 1998;43:428-34.
59. Millstein PL, Hsu CC. Differential accuracy of elastomeric recording materials
and associated weight change. J Prosthet Dent 1994;71:400-3.
60. Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass cor-
relation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016;15:
155-63.
Corresponding author:
Professor Ho-Beom Kwon
Dental Research Institute and Department of Prosthodontics
School of Dentistry
Seoul National University
101, Daehak-ro, Jongno-gu, Seoul 03080
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
Email: proskwon@snu.ac.kr
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Min-Young Jeong: Conceptualization, Methodology, Software, Investigation,
Writing e original draft, Visualization. Myung-Joo Kim: Writing e review &
editing, Investigation, Resources. Young-Jun Lim: Writing e review & editing,
Investigation, Resources. Ho-Beom Kwon: Conceptualization, Methodology,
Writing e review & editing, Supervision, Project administration.
Copyright © 2021 by the Editorial Council for The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.11.026
THE JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY