2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.11.030
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Relationship between malocclusion, orthodontic treatment, and tooth wear

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Many previous studies have reported that males had significantly greater attrition than females. 2,5,[7][8][9] In the present study, however, there was no statistically significant difference, although the mean tooth wear of male subjects (2.3 6 1.5 mm 3 ) was greater than that of female subjects (1.9 6 1.2 mm 3 ) ( Table 2). There were no statistically significant differences between the right and left canines ( Table 3).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 48%
“…Many previous studies have reported that males had significantly greater attrition than females. 2,5,[7][8][9] In the present study, however, there was no statistically significant difference, although the mean tooth wear of male subjects (2.3 6 1.5 mm 3 ) was greater than that of female subjects (1.9 6 1.2 mm 3 ) ( Table 2). There were no statistically significant differences between the right and left canines ( Table 3).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 48%
“…● Most deviations in occlusal traits have not been shown to be significantly associated with TSL ( Mwangi et al, 2009 ; Rugh et al, 1984 ; Seligman et al, 1988 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…shown to be significantly associated with TSL (Mwangi et al, 2009;Rugh et al, 1984;Seligman et al, 1988).…”
Section: • • Most Deviations In Occlusal Traits Have Not Beenmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…There is growing consensus that tooth wear observed in any individual may be the result of a combination of all the possible etiological factors over the lifetime of the dentition 3 . Tooth surface loss has been classified as erosion (dissolution of hard tissue by acidic substances), attrition (wear through tooth‐tooth contact), abrasion (wear produced by interaction between teeth and other materials), and abfraction 4–8 . Abfraction has also been described as wedge‐shaped defects, 9 noncarious cervical lesions, 10–13 and stress‐induced cervical lesions 14–15 …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%