{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0275049115913556, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007858546168958742, 'mean_word_length': 5.408805031446541, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Recording condylar movement with two facebow systems.

Two different articulator systems are commonly used by orthodontists to reveal the maxillomandibular relationship for improved diagnosis and treatment planning. The purposes of the study were: (1) to compare the SAM and the Panadent articulator systems when recording condylar discrepancies for the same patient; (2) to evaluate the interchangeability of the SAM estimated facebow when mounting to the Panadent articulator; and (3) to evaluate the direction of condylar movement between centric relation (CR) and centric occlusion (CO). Maxillary and mandibular impressions, CO and CR bite registrations, and SAM and Panadent facebow recordings were taken for 37 patients. There were no statistically significant differences between the SAM and the Panadent systems (p > 0.05). However, the SAM facebow should not be used when mounting to the Panadent articulator. In most cases, the condyle moves down and back when the subject bites into maximum intercuspation.