Kenyon BJ, Van Zyl I, Louie KG. Comparison of cavity preparation quality using an electric motor handpiece and an air turbine dental handpiece. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005; 136:(8)1101-1105
Poon BK, Smales RJ. Assessment of clinical preparations for single gold and ceramometal crowns. Quintessence Int. 2001; 32:(8)603-610
Aminian A, Brunton PA. A comparison of the depths produced using three different tooth preparation techniques. J Prosthet Dent. 2003; 89:(1)19-22
Chung EM, Sung EC, Wu B, Caputo AA. Comparing cutting efficiencies of diamond burs using a high-speed electric handpiece. Gen Dent. 2006; 54:(4)254-257
Choi C, Driscoll CF, Romberg E. Comparison of cutting efficiencies between electric and air-turbine dental handpieces. J Prosthet Dent. 2010; 103:(2)101-107
Oztürk B, Uşümez A, Oztürk AN, Ozer F. In vitro assessment of temperature change in the pulp chamber during cavity preparation. J Prosthet Dent. 2004; 91:(5)436-440
Watson TF, Flanagan D, Stone DG. High and low torque handpieces: cutting dynamics, enamel cracking and tooth temperature. Br Dent J. 2000; 188:(12)680-686
Eikenberg SL. Comparison of the cutting efficiencies of electric motor and air turbine dental handpieces. Gen Dent. 2001; 49:(2)199-204
Gaspersic D. Enamel microhardness and histological features of composite enamel pearls of different size. J Oral Pathol Med. 1995; 24:(4)153-158
Christensen GJ. Are electric handpieces an improvement?. J Am Dent Assoc. 2002; 133:(10)1433-1434
Pinero J. Exploring evolutions in dental handpieces. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2002; 23:(1)4-9
Poole RL, Lea SC, Dyson JE, Shortall AC, Walmsley AD. Vibration characteristics of dental high-speed turbines and speed-increasing handpieces. J Dent. 2008; 36:(7)488-493
Wood KC, Berzins DW, Luo Q, Thompson GA, Toth JM, Nagy WW. Resistance to fracture of two all-ceramic crown materials following endodontic access. J Prosthet Dent. 2006; 95:(1)33-41
Zach L, Cohen G. Pulp response to externally applied heat. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1965; 19:515-530
Ercoli C, Rotella M, Funkenbusch PD, Russell S, Feng C. In vitro comparison of the cutting efficiency and temperature production of ten different rotary cutting instruments. Part II: electric handpiece and comparison with turbine. J Prosthet Dent. 2009; 101:(5)319-331
Siegel SC, von Fraunhofer JA. The effect of handpiece spray patterns on cutting efficiency. J Am Dent Assoc. 2002; 133:(2)184-188
Electric Handpiece Systems: Severe Burns Associated with Inadequate Maintenance. 2007; 2:(3)
Kazen DH. Modern electric handpieces feature improved benefits for today's dental surgeon. Dent Assist. 2005; 74:(1)16-25
Hall DL. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and infection control for restorative dental treatment in nursing homes. Spec Care Dentist. 2003; 23:(3)100-107
Contemporary restorative procedures demand precise detail in tooth preparation to achieve optimal results. Inadequate tooth preparation is a frequent cause of failure. This review considers the electric high-speed, high-torque handpiece and how it may assist clinicians in achieving greater accuracy in tooth preparation.
Clinical Relevance: The electric handpiece provides a satisfactory alternative to the air-turbine and may be considered by clinicians who wish greater control with operative procedures.
Article
Since the foot-powered dental drill was invented by James Beall Morrison in 1871, operative dentistry has relied heavily on rotary instrumentation. The air rotor was first introduced in 1957 and, for many clinicians, remains the most popular technique for high-speed tooth preparation1,2 (Figure 1).
In recent years, the profession has moved away from providing restorations that require conventional tooth preparations and, instead, moved towards the use of minimally invasive restorative techniques. The success of these techniques demands extremely accurate and precise tooth preparations.3–7 Ibbetson8 has suggested that a precise 0.5 mm axial groove preparation is important for the provision of predictable adhesive bridgework. Magne and Belser9 have demonstrated that porcelain restorations can be successfully used to restore damaged teeth in the presence of a strong porcelain to enamel bond. It should be appreciated, however, that enamel can be extremely thin at the amelocemental junction (acj) and unintentional overpreparation in this area is a frequent problem, leaving little or no enamel on which to bond.
Register now to continue reading
Thank you for visiting Dental Update and reading some of our resources. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits: