JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Monaca, E. Articles by Wappler, F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Monaca, E. Articles by Wappler, F. Related Collections Airway Technology

---

TECHNOLOGY, COMPUTING, AND SIMULATION

The Effectiveness of Preformed Tooth Protectors During Endotracheal Intubation: An Upper Jaw Model

Enrico Monaca, MD^*, Norbert Fock, MD, Manfred Doehn, MD^*, and Frank Wappler, MD^*

From the *Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hospital Cologne-Merheim, University of Witten/Herdecke, Germany; and Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (OMS), University of Vienna, Austria.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Enrico Monaca, MD, Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Hospital Cologne-Merheim, University of Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, D-51109 Köln, Germany. Address e-mail to MonacaE{at}Kliniken-Koeln.de.

BACKGROUND: In anesthetic practice, tooth damage may impair patient safety and is a common reason for litigation. The use of dental shields may reduce this complication. In this study, we examined the effectiveness of dental shields for altering the force on the teeth during endotracheal intubation.

METHODS: Five preformed dental shields (Endoragard, Ormco, Nouveau Dispositif (ND), PEB, and Camo) were evaluated in three different categories: (a) horizontal force reduction, (b) axial force reduction, and (c) impact on the view of the oral cavity. Force reduction was examined by using an upper jaw model. The upper incisors of the model were covered with each of the dental shields and then loaded with a force of 150 N via a blade of a laryngoscope directed to the maxillary left central incisor (tooth 9). The force distributed to the four maxillary central and lateral incisors by the dental shield was also measured by strain gauges placed to estimate the force applied to each tooth. The reduction in oral view was determined by measuring the thickness of each dental shield with a micrometer.

RESULTS: Dental shield Ormco Sports-Guard achieved the highest force reduction results, followed by Camo and Endoragard. ND and PEB showed poor, but statistically significant, force reduction with either the worst axial (ND) or horizontal (PEB) results. In contrast, Ormco was the most voluminous model, followed by ND and Camo. PEB and Endoragard were the thinnest models.

CONCLUSIONS: Preformed dental shields are useful to reduce the force applied to the teeth and potentially reduce the probability of tooth damage during laryngoscopy. However, the shield with the most force reduction capability is rather large and also expensive, making general use impossible. Further prospective studies are needed to evaluate efficacy and safety of tooth protectors.

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999