title: Comparison of the cutting efficiencies of electric motor and air turbine dental handpieces.
abstract: As part of a larger comprehensive performance evaluation to determine whether electric motor handpieces are a suitable substitute for air turbine handpieces in a portable field dental treatment and operating system, the cutting efficiencies of electric motor and air turbine handpieces were compared. A device was made that applies an identical cutting force to a glass ceramic material for each handpiece tested. The laboratory results show that with equal amounts of applied force, the electric motor handpiece cuts a glass ceramic material significantly more efficiently (volume of material removed per second) than does the air turbine. In clinical trials, after minimal experience utilizing the electric motor, the majority of dentists felt that the electric motor cut tooth and amalgam more efficiently than did the air turbine.
authors: U.S. Army Dental Research Institute, Walter Reed Army Institute of Research at Great Lakes, IL, USA.
authors: S L
authors: SL
authors: Eikenberg
mesh_terms: D000180:Acrylic Resins / Q000737:chemistry; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D002516:Ceramics / Q000737:chemistry; D003188:Composite Resins / Q000737:chemistry; D003722:Dental Alloys / Q000737:chemistry; D003723:Dental Amalgam / Q000737:chemistry; D003737:Dental Cavity Preparation / Q000295:instrumentation; D003754:Dental High-Speed Equipment; D003762:Dental Instruments; D003764:Dental Materials / Q000737:chemistry; D003776:Dental Porcelain / Q000737:chemistry; D003815:Dentists; D004560:Electricity; D004867:Equipment Design; D005898:Glass / Q000737:chemistry; D006801:Humans; D008422:Materials Testing; D013242:Sterilization; D013314:Stress, Mechanical; D013499:Surface Properties; D013997:Time Factors; D014070:Tooth / Q000601:surgery
chemical_list: D000180:Acrylic Resins; D003188:Composite Resins; D003722:Dental Alloys; D003764:Dental Materials; D003776:Dental Porcelain; D003723:Dental Amalgam; C023506:Glass ceramics