File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Investigations into the use of an ultrasonic chisel to cut bone. Part 1: Forces applied by clinicians

TitleInvestigations into the use of an ultrasonic chisel to cut bone. Part 1: Forces applied by clinicians
Authors
KeywordsBone Cutting
Oral Surgery
Ultrasonic Chisel
Issue Date2000
PublisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jdent
Citation
Journal Of Dentistry, 2000, v. 28 n. 1, p. 31-37 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: To measure in vitro the direction and force of applied loads applied by clinicians when using both a conventional slow surgical handpiece (CH) and an ultrasonic chisel (USC) for cutting bone. Study design: Five clinicians were asked to cut bovine bone using either an USC or a CH. The bone was placed on a force measurement system that could measure both longitudinal and downward loads. The rate of cut was calculated over a fixed time-period and the depth of cut measured using a penetratometer. Results: The magnitude of the longitudinal forces generated varied between 1.48 and 3.22 N (USC) and 0.04 and 4.56 N (CH). The CH had a pulling force directed towards the operator. Both instruments produced a similar range of downward forces although there was intra- and inter-operator variability. The rate of cut varied in a similar manner, however, the CH produced a significantly greater depth of cut (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The force measurement system demonstrated differences in the way clinicians used the USC and CH instruments to cut bone. Of the two cutting methods investigated, the rotary bur is more efficient than the ultrasonic chisel. An ultrasonic chisel does cut bone in a different manner from a conventional bur and clinicians may require training before using it clinically. © 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/174204
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.109
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.029
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKhambay, BSen_US
dc.contributor.authorWalmsley, ADen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-11-22T01:58:31Z-
dc.date.available2012-11-22T01:58:31Z-
dc.date.issued2000en_US
dc.identifier.citationJournal Of Dentistry, 2000, v. 28 n. 1, p. 31-37en_US
dc.identifier.issn0300-5712en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/174204-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To measure in vitro the direction and force of applied loads applied by clinicians when using both a conventional slow surgical handpiece (CH) and an ultrasonic chisel (USC) for cutting bone. Study design: Five clinicians were asked to cut bovine bone using either an USC or a CH. The bone was placed on a force measurement system that could measure both longitudinal and downward loads. The rate of cut was calculated over a fixed time-period and the depth of cut measured using a penetratometer. Results: The magnitude of the longitudinal forces generated varied between 1.48 and 3.22 N (USC) and 0.04 and 4.56 N (CH). The CH had a pulling force directed towards the operator. Both instruments produced a similar range of downward forces although there was intra- and inter-operator variability. The rate of cut varied in a similar manner, however, the CH produced a significantly greater depth of cut (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The force measurement system demonstrated differences in the way clinicians used the USC and CH instruments to cut bone. Of the two cutting methods investigated, the rotary bur is more efficient than the ultrasonic chisel. An ultrasonic chisel does cut bone in a different manner from a conventional bur and clinicians may require training before using it clinically. © 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jdenten_US
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Dentistryen_US
dc.subjectBone Cuttingen_US
dc.subjectOral Surgeryen_US
dc.subjectUltrasonic Chiselen_US
dc.titleInvestigations into the use of an ultrasonic chisel to cut bone. Part 1: Forces applied by cliniciansen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailKhambay, BS: bkhambay@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityKhambay, BS=rp01691en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/S0300-5712(99)00043-3-
dc.identifier.pmid10666959-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0033630269en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0033630269&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume28en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage31en_US
dc.identifier.epage37en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000083752800005-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKhambay, BS=7003979053en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWalmsley, AD=7103287712en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats