1988
DOI: 10.1016/0278-2391(88)90296-0
|Get access via publisher |Summarize |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts

A comparison of stimulated bite force after mandibular advancement using rigid and nonrigid fixation

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
20
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
1

Year Published

Range
1989
1989
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
16
4
2

Relationship

0
22

Authors

Journals

citations

Cited by 22 publications

(5 citation statements)
references

References 21 publications

0
4
0
1
Order By: Relevance
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…In the current study, the period of maxillomandibular fixation did not exceed 14 days in all cases of both the study and the control group. This is advised to avoid any negative musculoskeletal changes or decrease in the range of mandibular opening that may occur if maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) was left long (9)(10)(11).…”
Section: Discussion
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The effect of MMF on the masticatory system must be taken in consideration together with the negative muscloskeletal changes that prolonged MMF may cause despite the advantages of conservative treatment (8). These changes include atrophy of the muscles of mastication, thinning of the condylar cartilage of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), and decreased range of mandibular opening (9)(10)(11). Some of these changes are reversible to varying degrees, depending on when function is restored via intensive physiotherapy.…”
Section: The Efficacy Of Arthrocentesis On Restoring Mandibular Funct
mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation