Fracture and Structural Integrity e-ISSN 1971-8993 Open access
Impact & Dynamics Vol. 15, No. 57 (2021)

Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards

Author and affiliation details
  • Maria Moreira FMUC, Dep. of Dental Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
  • João Carlos Ramos FMUC, Dep. of Dental Medicine, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
  • Ana Messias University of Coimbra, CEMMPRE, Dep. of Mechanical Engineering, Coimbra, Portugal ORCID iD0000-0003-4019-9379
  • Maria Augusta Neto University of Coimbra, CEMMPRE, Dep. of Mechanical Engineering, Coimbra, Portugal ORCID iD0000-0003-3030-0146
  • Ana Paula Amaro University of Coimbra, CEMMPRE, Dep. of Mechanical Engineering, Coimbra, Portugal ORCID iD0000-0001-5237-0773
  • Paulo NB Reis Corresponding author University of Coimbra, CEMMPRE, Dep. of Mechanical Engineering, Coimbra, Portugal ORCID iD0000-0001-5203-3670 paulo.reis@dem.uc.pt
DOI
10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06
Pages
63-69
Published
Licence
CC BY 4.0

Abstract

Up to this moment, there is no guideline regarding the materials to produce mouthguards. The most used is Ethylene-Vinyl Acetate (EVA). Studies indicate that laminating EVA sheets with rigid components could increase the protection capacities of the mouthguards whereas other studies suggest that only replacement of the material within it structure can increase energy absorption. The aim of this work is to evaluate the impact response of four different foils when compared to a 4 mm thickness EVA sheet. Five groups of different materials were subjected to impact tests with energies of 1.72 J, 2.85 J and 4.40 J. In this context was considered the following materials: EVA foils (G1), EVA foils with an EVA foam core (G2), EVA foils with an acetate core (G3), Foils of Erkoloc-pro (G4) and Foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5). Comparisons between the materials were made by qualitative analysis of the average energy-time and load-displacement curves, as well as by comparison of the peak load, maximum displacement, contact time and absorbed energy using the Kruskal-Wallis test. It was possible to conclude that statistically significant differences were found in the energy absorbed (p=0.001). Laminated foils with a soft core (G2) are a good option to produce mouthguards, while EVA foils with an acetate core (G3) and foils of Ortho IBT resin (G5) were declared unsuitable.

Keywords

Article history

  1. ReceivedUntil the next stage: 32 days
  2. Revision requestedUntil the next stage: 1 day
  3. RevisedUntil the next stage: 1 day
  4. AcceptedUntil the next stage: 40 days
  5. Published

How to cite

APA

Moreira, M., Ramos, J. C., Messias, A., Neto, M. A., Amaro, A. P., & Reis, P. N. (2021). Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards. Fracture and Structural Integrity, 15(57), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06

IEEE

M. Moreira, J. C. Ramos, A. Messias, M. A. Neto, A. P. Amaro, and P. N. Reis, “Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards,” Fracture and Structural Integrity, vol. 15, no. 57, pp. 63–69, 2021, doi: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06.

MLA

Moreira, Maria, et al. “Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards.” Fracture and Structural Integrity, vol. 15, no. 57, 2021, pp. 63–69. https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06.

Chicago

Moreira, Maria, João Carlos Ramos, Ana Messias, Maria Augusta Neto, Ana Paula Amaro, and Paulo NB Reis. 2021. “Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards.” Fracture and Structural Integrity 15 (57): 63–69. https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06.

Harvard

Moreira, M., Ramos, J.C., Messias, A., Neto, M.A., Amaro, A.P. and Reis, P.N. (2021) ‘Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards’, Fracture and Structural Integrity, 15(57), pp. 63–69. doi: 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06.

Vancouver

Moreira M, Ramos JC, Messias A, Neto MA, Amaro AP, Reis PN. Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards. Fracture and Structural Integrity. 2021;15(57):63-69. doi:10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06

BibTeX

@article{moreira2021, author = {Moreira, Maria and Ramos, João Carlos and Messias, Ana and Neto, Maria Augusta and Amaro, Ana Paula and Reis, Paulo NB}, title = {Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards}, journal = {Fracture and Structural Integrity}, year = {2021}, volume = {15}, number = {57}, pages = {63--69}, doi = {10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06}, url = {https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06}, issn = {1971-8993} }

RIS

TY - JOUR AU - Moreira, Maria AU - Ramos, João Carlos AU - Messias, Ana AU - Neto, Maria Augusta AU - Amaro, Ana Paula AU - Reis, Paulo NB TI - Impact response of different materials for sports mouthguards JO - Fracture and Structural Integrity T2 - Fracture and Structural Integrity PY - 2021 DA - 2021/06/22 VL - 15 IS - 57 SP - 63 EP - 69 DO - 10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06 UR - https://doi.org/10.3221/IGF-ESIS.57.06 SN - 1971-8993 ER -

Licence

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

May be shared and adapted, provided appropriate credit is given. Copyright © 2021 Maria Moreira, João Carlos Ramos, Ana Messias, Maria Augusta Neto, Ana Paula Amaro, Paulo NB Reis.

Copyright 
Authors are allowed to retain both the copyright and the publishing rights of their articles without restrictions.  

Open Access Statement

Fracture and Structural Integrity (F&SI) is an open-access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the DOAI definition of open access.

F&SI operates under the Creative Commons Licence Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0). This allows to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, to remix, transform and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, but giving appropriate credit, providing a link to the license, and indicating if changes were made.

Similar articles