Search

Submitted by Jean Medeiros (jeanletras@uepb.edu.br) on 2017-07-26T14:12:57Z No. of bitstreams: 1 PDF - Janaína Benício Marques.pdf: 14648505 bytes, checksum: d012b9258828a4761e4dc0c746b9ce9a (MD5) Approved for entry into archive by Secta BC (secta.csu.bc@uepb.edu.br) on 2017-08-29T15:31:07Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 PDF - Janaína Benício Marques.pdf: 14648505 bytes, checksum: d012b9258828a4761e4dc0c746b9ce9a (MD5) Made available in DSpace on 2017-08-29T15:31:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 PDF - Janaína Benício Marques.pdf: 14648505 bytes, checksum: d012b9258828a4761e4dc0c746b9ce9a (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-01-25 OBJECTIVE: To compare earmolds obtained by the CAD / CAM system and the conventional pre-molding method. METHODS: Comfort sensations and anthropometric measures were analyzed in 30 ears of 15 volunteers randomly selected from a private clinic in a Brazilian Northeast Municipality, who underwent two procedures to obtain measurements, a CT scan composing the case group and preforming, constituting the control group. After the preparation of the silicone earmolds, the physical test of the devices was performed by the blind study method, in which the participants were not aware of the origin of each mold. RESULTS: The concepts Regular (53.3%), Good (20%) and Bad (20%), in the control group prevailed, based on the self-perception of the participants, while in the method proposed by the biomodel the concepts Good (73.3%) and Optimum (26.7%). As for the anthropometric linear measurements per ear in each of the evaluation forms: Conventional Preform, Conventional Silicone, Biomodel and Mold proposed significant differences (p