Various cookies are used on our website: We use technically necessary cookies for the purpose of enabling functions such as login or a shopping cart. We use optional cookies for marketing and optimization purposes, in particular to place relevant and interesting ads for you on Meta's platforms (Facebook, Instagram). You can refuse optional cookies. More information on data collection and processing can be found in our privacy policy.
Okt. 2002-Jan. 2008: Studium Mathematik und Informatik. Okt. 2006-Jan. 2008: Mitarbeiter im Centrum für Angewandte Informatik, Flexibles Lernen und Telemedizin. Seit Feb. 2008: Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter im ZZMK, Abteilung für Digitale Zahnmedizin - Okklusions- und Kaufunktionstherapie. Dez. 2008: Diplom in Mathematik an der Universität Greifswald. Jan. 2014: Promotion zum Dr. rer. med. an der Universitätsmedizin Greifswald.
Events
Deutscher Zahnärztetag 2019
8. Nov 2019 — 9. Nov 2019Congress Center Messe Frankfurt
Speakers: Karl-Ludwig Ackermann, Sarah Al-Maawi, Kurt Werner Alt, Jassin Arnold, Thomas Attin, Mustafa Ayna, Anna Greta Barbe, Ingo Baresel, Jens Baresel, Tobias Bauer, Ursula Becker, Wilfried Beckmann, Christoph Benz, Lisa Bitterich, Dirk Bleiel, Uwe Blunck, Martin Boost, Andreas Braun, Anne Bredel-Geissler, Wolfgang Buchalla, Egon Burian, Sebastian Bürklein, Iain L. C. Chapple, Wolfgang Christian, Fabian Cieplik, Bettina Dannewitz, Monika Daubländer, Sybille David-Hebgen, Isabel Deckwer, James Deschner, Annika Döding, Christof Dörfer, Heike Dyrna, Norbert Engel, Peter Engel, Susanne Fath, Michael Frank, Roland Frankenberger, Rene Franzen, Cornelia Frese, Tobias Fretwurst, Michael Gahlert, Roland Garve, Werner Geurtsen, Shahram Ghanaati, Christiane Gleissner, Ulrike Gonder, Werner Götz, Dominik Groß, Knut A. Grötz, Martin Guffart, Norbert Gutknecht, Cornelius Haffner, Thorsten Halling, Frederic Hermann, Carlos Herrera-Vizcaino, Tim Hilgenfeld, Jürgen Hoffmann, Martin Hoffmann, Fabian Huettig, Alfons Hugger, Christine Hutschenreuter, Bruno Imhoff, Silke Jacker-Guhr, Søren Jepsen, A. Rainer Jordan, Alexander Jürchott, Bärbel Kahl-Nieke, Peer W. Kämmerer, Philipp Kanzow, Nele Kettler, Christian Kirschneck, Lydia Kogler, Bernd Kordaß, Franz-Josef Kramer, Norbert Krämer, Felix Krause, Matthis Krischel, Joachim Krois, Christina Kühne, Conrad Kühnöl, Bernd Lapatki, Silke Lehmann-Binder M.Sc., Christian Leonhardt, Ivona Leventic, Daniel Lindel, Jörg Alexander Lisson, Ulrike Lübbert, Elmar Ludwig, Anne-Katrin Lührs, Michael Lüpke, Frank Georg Mathers, Wibke Merten, Georg Meyer, Wolfram Misselwitz, Karin Mölling, Mhd Said Mourad, Dietmar Friedrich Müller, Moritz Mutschler, Katja Nickel, Nicole Nicklisch, Ina Nitschke, Olaf Oberhofer, Karina Obreja, Dietmar Oesterreich, Rebecca Otto, Simon Peroz, Peter Pospiech, Florian Probst, Monika Probst, Michael Rädel, Sven Reich, Katharina Reichenmiller, Katharina Reinecke, Daniel R. Reißmann, Bernd Reiss, Stefan Ries, Christiane Rinnen, Katharina Röher, Jerome Rotgans, Uwe Rudol, Sebastian Ruge, Michael Rumpf, Heidrun Schaaf, Claudia Schaller, Karina Schick, Ulrich Schiffner, Maximiliane Amelie Schlenz, Alexander Schmidt, Mathias Schmidt, Andrea-Maria Schmidt-Westhausen, Julian Schmoeckel, Wolfgang Schneider, Sigmar Schnutenhaus, Holger Schön, Andreas Schulte, Nelly Schulz-Weidner, Karola Schulze, Ralf Schulze, Falk Schwendicke, Thomas A. Schwenk, Andreas Simka, Ralf Smeets, Önder Solakoglu, David Sonntag, Hansmartin Spatzier, Benedikt Spies, Norbert Staab, Sabine Steding, Angela Stillhart, Marcus Stoetzer, Hendrik Terheyden, Andrea Thumeyer, Marin Vodanovic, Kai Voß, Maximilian Voß, Wolfgang Wahlster, Michael Walter, Sandra Weber, Almut Johanna Weigel, Paul Weigl, Michael Weiss, Hans-Jürgen Wenz, Johannes-Simon Wenzler, Christian Wesemann, Jens Westemeier, Lotta Westphal, Matthias Widbiller, Annette Wiegand, Horst Willeweit, Karl Frederick Wilms, Sandra Windecker, Michael M. Wolf, Anne Wolowski, Bernd Wöstmann, Sylvia Wuttig
Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH
Deutscher Zahnärztetag 2018
MISSERFOLGE - erkennen, beherrschen, vermeiden9. Nov 2018 — 10. Nov 2018Congress Center Messe Frankfurt
Speakers: Karl-Ludwig Ackermann, Sarah Al-Maawi, Bilal Al-Nawas, Kurt Werner Alt, Anna Greta Barbe, Tobias Bauer, Daniel Bäumer, Marco Baz Bartels, Grietje Beck, Katrin Bekes, Christoph Benz, Dirk Bleiel, Johannes Boesch, Martin Boost, Wolfgang Buchalla, Oskar Bunz, Fabian Cieplik, Monika Daubländer, Sybille David-Hebgen, Andreas Dehler, Renate Deinzer, Sonja H. M. Derman, Konstanze Diekmeyer, Ingmar Dobberstein, Heike Dyrna, Thomas Eger, Guido Elsäßer, Anne Sophie Engel, Peter Engel, Norbert Enkling, Susanne Fath, Stefan Fickl, Michael Frank, Roland Frankenberger, Rene Franzen, Kerstin Galler, Carolina Ganß, Roland Garve, Christian Ralf Gernhardt, Werner Geurtsen, Shahram Ghanaati, Petra Gierthmühlen, Christiane Gleissner, Werner Götz, Susanne Grässel, Dominik Groß, Stefan Grümer, Claus Grundmann, Martin Guffart, Heinz-Michael Günther, Norbert Gutknecht, Peter Hahner, Elmar Hellwig, Christian Henrici, Katrin Hertrampf, Fabian Huettig, Michael Hülsmann, Bruno Imhoff, Steffani Janko, Holger Jentsch, A. Rainer Jordan, Ana Elisa Kauling, Moritz Kebschull, Christian Kirschneck, Joachim Klimek, Andrea Klink, Thomas Klinke, Birte Koch, Thomas Kocher, Eva Köllensperger, Heike Maria Korbmacher-Steiner, Bernd Kordaß, Hannah Kottmann, Pablo Krämer-Fernandez, Gabriel Krastl, Birgit Krause, Till Kreutzer, Conrad Kühnöl, Stefanie Kurzschenkel, Thorsten Kuypers, Günter Lauer, Hans-Christoph Lauer, Elfi Laurisch, Tina Lawall, Karl Martin Lehmann, Silke Lehmann-Binder M.Sc., Dirk Leisenberg, Ulrike Lübbert, Michael Lüpke, Thomas Malik, Jutta Margraf-Stiksrud, Lorenz Meinel, Gudrun Mentel, Wibke Merten, Louisa Mewes, Johanna Isabel Moosmüller, Martin U. Müller, Wolfgang Müller, Nicole Nicklisch, Ina Nitschke, Michael J. Noack, Marina Nörr-Müller, Karina Obreja, Dietmar Oesterreich, Puria Parvini, Ingrid Peroz, Waldemar Petker, Oksana Petruchin, Andree Piwowarczyk, Peter Pospiech, Peter Proff, Sven Reich, Katharina Reichenmiller, Katharina Reinecke, Bernd Reiss, Svenja Rink, Christiane Rinnen, Jerome Rotgans, Sebastian Ruge, Didem Sahin, Sonja Sälzer, Petra Santander, Heidrun Schaaf, Jürgen Schäffer, Elisabeth Schiffner, Ulrich Schiffner, Markus Schlee, Maximiliane Amelie Schlenz, Peter Schmidt, Andrea-Maria Schmidt-Westhausen, Claas Ole Schmitt, Sigmar Schnutenhaus, Jörg Schröder, Gerd Schröter, Andreas Schulte, Philipp Schwaab, Frank Schwarz, Falk Schwendicke, Clemens Schwerin, Sinan Sen, Önder Solakoglu, Hansmartin Spatzier, Christian H. Splieth, Norbert Staab, Bernd Stadlinger, Sabine Steding, Marcus Stoetzer, Giorgio Tabanella, Gisela Tascher, Hendrik Terheyden, Valentina A. Tesky, Jan Tetsch, Juliane von Hoyningen-Huene, Maximilian Voß, Michael Walter, Alexander Welk, Dietmar Weng, Hans-Jürgen Wenz, Jens Westemeier, Lotta Westphal, Annette Wiegand, Karl Frederick Wilms, Michael M. Wolf, Diana Wolff, Anne Wolowski, Johann-Dietrich Wörner, Sylvia Wuttig, Mohamed Younis, Stefan Zimmer, Lisa Zumpe
Quintessenz Verlags-GmbH
This author's journal articles
Quintessenz Zahnmedizin, 5/2022
Zahnheilkunde interdisziplinärPages 508-513, Language: GermanKordaß, Bernd / Ruge, Sebastian
Die Digitalisierung in der Zahnmedizin und Zahntechnik schreitet unaufhaltsam voran. Auch die Funktionsdiagnostik und -therapie einschließlich der Kieferrelationsbestimmung profitiert davon. Allerdings ist es wichtig zu wissen, was der digitalen Okklusion zugrunde liegt und welche Gesichtspunkte bei der Interpretation zu berücksichtigen sind. Gegenüber der analogen Welt liegt alles in „Zahlen“ vor, was ohne Zweifel ein eminenter Vorteil ist. Vor allem lassen sich auch die Fehler und Unschärfen besser einschätzen, mit denen wir es beim Scannen und Registrieren, aber letztlich auch beim Umsetzen und Fertigen von Restaurationen zu tun haben. In der praktischen Anwendung kommt es trotz allem auf viel Erfahrungswissen und letztlich intuitives Ausprobieren an, bis wirklich ein zufriedenstellendes Optimum erreicht werden kann.
Manuskripteingang: 14.03.2022, Manuskriptannahme: 17.03.2022
Keywords: Digitale Okklusion, digitale Simulation, CAD/CAM, Okklusionsanalyse
When utilizing CAD/CAM systems to design and manufacture dental prostheses and occlusal splints, one soon wonders: How accurate is virtual occlusion? Conventional methods involving dental impressions, plaster casts, articulators, and manual verification tools such as articulating paper have well-known sources of error and error chains, and tried and tested error-handling strategies for many of them already exist. Digital workflows, on the other hand, are still very new and unfamiliar to some dentists. Besides digital processes such as intraoral scanning and optoelectronic jaw motion tracking, analog processes may also be required. The penetration of maxillary and mandibular dental models is one aspect of digital dentistry that immediately attracts attention. Virtual penetration occurs because digital technology, like every measuring system, is subject to measurement error, and because virtual reality can only approximate the true variable nature of the physiologic masticatory system. The present article aims to identify and discuss variables that affect the accuracy of virtual occlusion. Some errors are first discovered in the digital world. Virtual capabilities open up new perspectives that have yet to be explored and understood.
Keywords: occlusion, virtual articulator, intraoral scan, jaw motion tracking
Evaluations of the regional baseline study (SHIP-1) with the Greifswald Digital Analyzing System (GEDAS)
Sufficient occlusion is a basic prerequisite for the functional efficiency of the occlusal surfaces. Exactly where and in what number the occlusal contacts in the posterior region should be present for this purpose is controversial.
Aim: The present study investigated the number and location of occlusal contacts on posterior teeth without dental findings, ie, without caries or restorative restorations such as fillings, crowns, etc. Such natural posterior teeth were present in 709 subjects (males [m] = 446: 48.9 ± 13.04 years, females [f] = 283: 52.4 ± 14.23 years) of a subject collective of 1223 subjects (m = 648, f = 575) of the regional baseline study ‘Study of Health in Pomerania 1’ (SHIP-1).
Materials and method: Silicone bite registrations in habitual intercuspation (IP) were evaluated, whereby the test persons were asked to fix the bite block with biting force without biting firmly. The registrations were scanned with a document scanner in incident and transmitted light; a calibration strip was used to determine the transparency threshold of a layer thickness of 20 μm, below and equal to which the transparent zone was considered as a contact or contact area. The Greifswald Digital Analyzing System 2 (GEDAS 2) software was used to determine the number and location of occlusal contact areas tooth by tooth. To define the localization of the contacts, a cross with two concentric circles symmetric to the longitudinal fissure was superimposed on the occlusal surface; this resulted in four inner and four outer quadrants. Thus, the number of pixels in occlusal contact areas per inner and outer quadrant could be determined. The image resolution was 300 dpi.
Results: On average (median), the premolars had two occlusal contacts each, the posterior teeth had four to five, and Vieltooth 46 had six contacts. The right and left teeth did not differ in the frequency of occlusal contacts in the Mann-Whitney U test for independent samples. In the maxillary premolars, frequent contact areas were primarily located mesially on the inner and outer slopes of the palatal cusp. In the maxillary molars, the palatal slope of the distopalatal cusp and the inner slopes of the mesiopalatal and distopalatal cusps were frequently addressed. On the mandibular premolars, the inner slopes of the buccal cusps and the buccal slope of the distobuccal cusp were particularly frequently addressed; in teeth 35 and 45, the buccal slope of the mesiobuccal cusp was also somewhat more frequently addressed. Teeth 36 and 46 frequently had contact areas on the buccal slope of the distobuccal cusp as well as on the inner slopes of the distal cusps (distobuccal and distolingual), whereas teeth 37 and 47 tended to behave similarly.
Conclusion: Epidemiologically, the focus of the frequent contact areas on the respective supporting cusps of the maxillary and mandibular posterior teeth and a distribution of contacts stabilizing the tooth in its position in the dental arch through the interlocking were confirmed. It makes sense to take this into account when designing occlusal surfaces in the posterior region.
Keywords: occlusion, occlusal contacts, posterior teeth, epidemiology
Sufficient occlusion is a basic prerequisite for the functional efficiency of the occlusal surfaces. Exactly where and in what number the occlusal contacts in the posterior region should be present for this purpose is controversial. The present study investigated the number and location of occlusal contacts on posterior teeth without dental findings, ie, without caries or restorative restorations such as fillings, crowns, etc. Such natural posterior teeth were present in 709 subjects (males (m) = 446: 48.9 ± 13.04 years, females (f) = 283: 52.4 ± 14.23 years) of a subject collective of 1223 subjects (m = 648, f = 575) of the regional baseline study ‘Study of Health in Pomerania 1’ (SHIP-1).
Silicone bite registrations in habitual intercuspation (IP) were evaluated, whereby the test persons were asked to fix the bite block with biting force without biting firmly. The registrations were scanned with a document scanner in incident and transmitted light; a calibration strip was used to determine the transparency threshold of a layer thickness of 20 μm, below and equal to which the transparent zone was considered as a contact or contact area. The Greifswald Digital Analyzing System 2 (GEDAS 2) software was used to determine the number and location of occlusal contact areas tooth by tooth. To define the localization of the contacts, a cross with two concentric circles symmetric to the longitudinal fissure was superimposed on the occlusal surface; this resulted in four inner and four outer quadrants. Thus, the number of pixels in occlusal contact areas per inner and outer quadrant could be determined. The image resolution was 300 dpi.
On average (median), the premolars had two occlusal contacts each, the posterior teeth had four to five, and tooth 46 had six contacts. The right and left teeth did not differ in the frequency of occlusal contacts in the Mann-Whitney U test for independent samples. In the maxillary premolars, frequent contact areas were primarily located mesially on the inner and outer slopes of the palatal cusp. In the maxillary molars, the palatal slope of the distopalatal cusp and the inner slopes of the mesiopalatal and distopalatal cusps were frequently affected. On the mandibular premolars, the inner slopes of the buccal cusps and the buccal slope of the distobuccal cusp were particularly frequently addressed; in teeth 35 and 45, the buccal slope of the mesiobuccal cusp was also somewhat more frequently addressed. Teeth 36 and 46 frequently had contact areas on the buccal slope of the distobuccal cusp as well as on the inner slopes of the distal cusps (distobuccal and distolingual), whereas teeth 37 and 47 tended to behave similarly.
Epidemiologically, the focus of the frequent contact areas on the respective supporting cusps of the maxillary and mandibular posterior teeth and a distribution of contacts stabilizing the tooth in its position in the dental arch through the interlocking were confirmed. It makes sense to take this into account when designing occlusal surfaces in the posterior region.
Keywords: occlusion, occlusal contacts, posterior teeth, epidemiology
Aim: The present prospective clinical study aimed to validate the Greifswald Digital Analyzing System (GEDAS) as a method for digital assessment of the occlusion in primary and mixed dentition.
Materials and methods: The reproducibility of GEDAS in primary and mixed dentition was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). In addition, the acceptability of the method to the dentist, the child, and the parent/caregiver was assessed using a modified visual analog scale of faces, the Frankl behavior scale, and the 10-point Likert scale. In total, 20 participants aged between 3 and 9 years (mean age: 6; standard deviation: ± 1.74) with primary (n = 10) and mixed (n = 10) dentition were recruited.
Results: The ICC for the number of contact points in all teeth was 0.94 and for the area of contact points was 0.97, indicating good to excellent reproducibility. The average total number of contacts per bite registration per arch in the primary and mixed dentition was 36.5 (17 to 66) and 37.9 (9 to 74), respectively. The average of the total area of interocclusal contact area in the primary and mixed dentition was 25.55 mm2 (5.39 to 70.20) and 29.59 mm2 (2.80 to 78.53), respectively. During the procedure, the majority of dentists reported the child’s behavior to be positive (85%) and found the procedure easy to perform (80%), short (6.0 min), and tolerable (80%).
Conclusion: GEDAS is an occlusal analysis tool with good acceptability and reproducibility in children and could be considered for the planning and assessment of restorative and orthodontic treatment in the intermediate stages.
Keywords: GEDAS, occlusion, digital, primary dentition, mixed dentition, bite registration
Bei der Digitalisierung beispielsweise von Modellen kommt es schnell zu Durchdringungen, die es in der Realität nicht gibt. Allerdings treten Abweichungen auch bei analogen Modellen auf. In jedem Fall ist es sinnvoll, die Okklusion durch ein zweites Verfahren zu überprüfen. Für digitale Restaurationen kann es sinnvoll sein, auch einmal leichte Durchdringungen zuzulassen, weil eventuell auch bewusst Führungsstrukturen aufgebaut werden sollen, die zunächst in der Konstruktion Durchdringungen zeigen. Die Erfahrung und Kompentenz der Zahntechniker kann bei der Weiterentwicklung der Systeme hilfreich sein.
Keywords: digitales Modell, Durchdringung, Intraoralscan, Okklusion
A hands-on method for instrument-based occlusal analysis with digital technology is presented using a patient case example. The method is based on new software for digital occlusal analysis that includes a new measuring system for recording mandibular function (Jaw Motion Analyser Optic System/oJMA). With the new system, occlusal contact patterns in the real movement function of the mandible are captured and analyzed digitally with regard to occlusal interferences or a suitable therapeutic position of the mandible. For this purpose, scans of both jaws are brought together with the movement recordings by means of a special coupling tray and then visualized together as one complete image. Since the movement paths of the temporomandibular joints (TMJs) are also captured, the new system makes it possible to define a suitable therapeutic position specifically aimed at relieving the TMJs, and a therapeutic change in the jaw relation can be adjusted, for instance, by using an occlusal splint. Dedicated software modules provide a layer-by-layer analysis of the intercuspation relationship and the generation of ‘envelopes’ for occlusal gliding movements. This system is used to gain a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between the structure and function of the occlusion. Interfaces to CAD software have also been established.
Keywords: instrumental analysis of occlusion, digital occlusion, CAD/CAM
Evaluations of the associated project of the SHIP study
When recording condylar movement paths with the aid of electronic measuring systems, it is often found that, especially in jaw opening and closing movements, excursive and incursive paths of movement are not congruent but run separately, independently of one another to a greater or lesser degree. The objective of the study was to investigate this phenomenon in the context of rotation vs translation behavior, also taking into consideration additional side-specific condylar movement patterns. For this purpose, the electronic movement records of habitual jaw opening of 259 participants of the associated project of the population-representative basic study SHIP 0 were evaluated. The condylar movement path (condylar tracing, ConTrac) at the arbitrary axis point, the excursion vs incursion behavior in the condylar tracing grid (ExInGrid), and the rotation vs translation behavior (RotTrans) were classified, and the translational condylar path and the maximum angle of rotation were determined metrically. Relationships between the parameters ConTrac, ExInGrid, and RotTrans were statistically analyzed using cross tabulations and Spearman's correlation coefficient. Only about 18% of ConTrac showed congruence of excursive and incursive movement path components, while 39% demonstrated noncongruent paths, and 43% showed further conspicuous features in the movement path. For the parameter ExInGrid, recognizable to highly pronounced loop formation patterns to a degree of 89% were observed in the condylar tracing grid. An average of 12.5 mm (min 2.1 mm, max 21.7 mm) was determined for the purely translational component of the condylar movement path, and 32.1 degrees (min 12 degrees, max 45 degrees) for the maximum angle of rotation. Concerning the rotation vs translation behavior, the linear basic pattern occurred at around 9%; the sigmoidal pattern at 28%; and the hysteretic, loopy or irregular pattern at 63%. The parameters RotTrans and ExInGrid showed a strong correlation, whereas the strength of the correlation for ConTrac and ExInGrid or RotTrans and ConTrac was evaluated as weak or very weak. The rotation vs translation behavior influences condylar movement paths in the positional relationship of excursive and incursive components. The visualization of several condylar movement paths in the form of a condylar tracing grid helps to capture complex rotational and translational motion components of the real condyles more effectively than the assessment of a single condylar movement path.
Keywords: population-based values of mandibular function, condylar movement path, functional diagnostics, jaw tracking, rotation vs translation relationship
The articulation parameters, especially the horizontal condylar inclination angle (HCI), the Bennett angle (BA), and the immediate side shift (ISS) were determined in 259 subjects (100 males; 159 females) of the associated project with reference to the population-representative baseline study (Study of Health in Pomerania, SHIP 0). The evaluations were based on a clinical functional status and electronic motion recording with the ultrasonic measuring system Jaw Motion Analyser (JMA, Zebris, Isny, Germany). The reference plane, to which all measured values were represented and the HCI calculated, was the hinge axis infraorbital plane (HA-IOP). The HCI was determined after an excursive movement with a length of 4 mm to the HA-IOP in the sagittal view and the BA after a mediotrusive excursion movement of 6 mm in the horizontal view to the midsagittal plane. For the standard and limit values, the average value in addition to the standard deviation and the 10th and 90th percentile value (10th percentile value, 90th percentile value) were determined: HCI right 52.1 ± 10.14 degrees (39.4 degrees, 64.0 degrees), HCI left 53.1 ± 9.67 degrees (42.3 degrees, 67.0 degrees), BA right 15.2 ± 7.53 degrees (6.7 degrees, 25.0 degrees), BA left 14.2 ± 7.84 degrees (5.4 degrees, 24.1 degrees). The HCI was approximately 2 to 3 degrees larger in females (males: right 50.5 ± 9.47 degrees, left 51.9 ± 8.99 degrees; females: right 53.1 ± 10.42 degrees, left 53.8 ± 10.03 degrees). Likewise, the BA in the age group ≥ 40 years (males: right 14.4 ± 6.62 degrees, left 13.1 ± 7.14 degrees; females: right 17.0 ± 9.02 degrees, left 16.9 ± 8.72 degrees). The latter proved to be statistically significant in the t test for independent samples, assuming variance equivalence on the right, with P = 0.009, and with rejection of the variant equivalence on the left, with P = 0.002. The right and left HCI and BA joint values showed highly significant linear dependence at P < 0.001, but rather low, however, for the HCI with r2 = 0.175 for the HCI and r2 = 0.228 for the BA. In 46% of cases, the right and left HCI values differed up to 5 degrees only; a further 20.9% were in an interval difference of between 5 and 10 degrees. The following results were shown for the differences in the BA: 56.4% of the cases were between 0 and 5 degrees, and 26.2% were in the interval ranges of 5 to 10 degrees. ISS occurred in 18.1% of cases on the right side of the joint, and in 27.8% of cases on the left side. On both sides of the joint it was significantly more frequent in the age group ≥ 40 years with assumed variance equality than in the age group < 40 years (P = 0.002 right, P = 0.003 left). The groups relating to the Helkimo index (HI) did not differ significantly in all function-specific parameters. If it is assumed that there is no significant influence on the occlusion if the HCI values differ by 7 to 8 degrees from the average value, only approximately one third of all cases (35.1%) were characterized by a purely average value setting in the articulator. In 41.7% of cases, one joint value was situated outside the average value range; in 23.2% of the cases both values were outside the average value range. Without a measurement of the condylar path inclination, however, it is impossible to decide to what extent the HCI deviates from the average value, and which joint side is larger or smaller than the other and to what extent. These results suggest that in extensive and complex cases, the articulator should be adjusted according to individual, function-specific joint values.
Keywords: population-based values of condylar adjustment, population-based standard and limit values for the adjustment of joint values, articulator, articulation, sagittal condylar inclination, horizontal condylar inclination angle (HCI), Bennett angle (BA)