Aim: This study aimed to evaluate OccluSense's reliability against conventional articulating films in assessing static occlusion. The study also targets to identify possible limitations and influencing factors when using this device to asses static occlusion.
Materials and methods: This experimental research utilized twenty epoxy resin typodont models representing various occlusal discrepancies. They were mounted in a CP Artex articulator, and static occlusion was assessed in maximum intercuspal position using shimstock foil as a gold standard. The digitally generated occlusograms by OccluSense were compared with conventional occlusal indicators, including 40 μm articulating paper (AP) and 12μm articulating foil (AF). Intrarater Reliability was assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ).
Result: AP and AF showed high reliability, with κ values of 0.94 and 0.93 respectively, indicating almost perfect agreement with the gold standard. In contrast, OccluSense demonstrated an overall reliability of κ = 0.22, signifying fair agreement. Notably, significant discrepancies in κ values were observed among different malocclusions, with deep bite exhibiting the lowest reliability at κ = 0.02, representing poor agreement (P<0.05).
Conclusion: OccluSense is less reliable compared to traditional methods, such as articulating paper, for assessing static occlusion. Its limitations are particularly evident in patients with deep bite, making it unsuitable as a standalone tool at the present time.