Abstract

(1) Background: Periodontal instrumentation with dental curettes is associated with discomfort, fatigue, and musculoskeletal diseases. The goal of this study was to compare comfort, fatigue, and muscle work using three different curettes. (2) Methods: Eight hygienists each scaled three typodonts using the three different curettes. Curette A was a prototype with a novel adaptive design, Curette B had a conventional stainless-steel design, and Curette C featured a conventional silicon-covered handle. Time-based work in four muscles, comfort, fatigue, tactile feedback, grip and blade position, and pinch and grasp strength were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using a General Linear Model (GLIM) and Tukey’s post hoc test. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05. (3) Results: Comfort, correct grasp, fingertip placement, and blade-to-tooth adaptation were significantly better with Curette A (p < 0.05). While pinch and grasp strength were significantly reduced post-instrumentation for Curettes B and C (p < 0.05), they remained unchanged for Curette A. Curette A required significantly less total muscle work and work in individual muscles, resulting in significantly less post-instrumentation fatigue than for Curettes B and C, but similar levels of tactile feedback (p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: The ergonomic performance of a prototype adaptive periodontal curette was significantly better than that of two conventional instruments with rigid handle designs.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call