[Comparative studies of the grinding methods by Jankelson and Lauritzen]

Area of Science:

• Dental occlusion analysis
• Prosthodontics
• Biomechanical modeling

Background:

• Accurate functional analysis of dental occlusion is crucial for successful prosthodontic treatment.
• Traditional methods involve intraoral grinding-in, which can be time-consuming and technique-sensitive.
• Articulators offer a controlled environment for simulating jaw movements and analyzing occlusal relationships.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the efficacy of intraoral grinding-in (Jankelson method) versus articulator-based grinding-in (Lauritzen method) for functional analysis of dental occlusion.
• To evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of each method.

Main Methods:

• Functional analysis was performed on 10 patients using the Dentatus articulator.
• Natural dentition was ground-in according to the Jankelson method in retruded contact position.
• Results from intraoral grinding-in were transferred to the articulator using the split cast method for analysis.

Main Results:

• Intraoral grinding-in according to Jankelson produced results that were clearly inferior to those achieved with articulator-based grinding-in.
• The articulator method provided a more accurate and reproducible analysis of occlusal relationships.

Conclusions:

• Articulator-based functional analysis, following the Lauritzen principles, is a superior method for evaluating dental occlusion compared to intraoral grinding-in.
• The split cast technique effectively transfers intraoral findings to the articulator for detailed analysis.