Nível de percepção dos cirurgiões-dentistas sobre métodos de análise oclusal

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Proper dental occlusion is essential for the health, functionality of the stomatognathic system, and aesthetics. Articulating paper is the most commonly used method for occlusal analysis; however, it presents limitations regarding the accuracy in identifying and quantifying occlusal contacts. With technological advances, digital methods such as Occlusense have emerged as alternatives for more reliable and faster recordings. This study aimed to evaluate the perception of dental surgeons regarding occlusal analysis methods by comparing records obtained using articulating paper and the Occlusense device. The goal was to assess the importance of digital methods, particularly in terms of accuracy, clinical time, technological advancement, and the ability to measure contact force and duration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a cross-sectional, quantitative study with a convenience sample composed of 41 dental surgeons from Natal-RN, selected from the 2,362 registered professionals with various specialties, all holding a degree in dentistry and possessing clinical experience. The data collection was carried out through a questionnaire in which participants evaluated the similarity of occlusal contacts in Maximum Habitual Intercuspation recorded with both 200μm articulating paper and the Occlusense. The questionnaire included multiple-choice options rated as clinically poor, clinically unsatisfactory, clinically good, and clinically excellent. Participants were also asked to assign a score from 1 to 10, where 1 indicated divergent contacts and 10 indicated visually very similar contacts. RESULTS: In the multiple-choice analysis, the most selected answer was option "C" (38%), which stated: “the perception of partially similar recordings, with points distributed in a similar but not uniform manner, with evidence of divergent contact in at least one element,” classified as "clinically good." Regarding the scoring analysis, intermediate values prevailed, with score 7 accounting for 19.6%, and 51.1% of responses falling between scores 6 and 8. This indicates a positive agreement in the perception of similarity between the methods, although they were not found to be entirely accurate. Additionally, the occurrence of scores 1 and 10 was low (12.6%), as well as options A and D (35.2%), reinforcing the predominance of intermediate results. CONCLUSION: According to the perception of dental surgeons, both conventional and digital methods present similarities, and the choice between them depends on the clinical situation, thereby contributing to more precise and predictable treatments.