Jaw TrackingNCT07203703
Comparing Jaw Tracking and Traditional Methods for Measuring Bite Accuracy in Patients With Teeth
A study testing Jaw Tracking Device in people with Jaw Tracking, run by Omer Abdelmagid.
Trial summary
This study compares two methods used to measure how teeth come together (occlusal contacts) in patients who have natural teeth (dentate patients). The first method uses a modern jaw tracking device, while the second relies on the conventional mounting technique. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 60 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Jaw Tracking
- What is being tested?
- Jaw Tracking Device
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 18 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 15 Oct 2025to 1 Feb 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 60 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients aged 18 to 60 years Presence of full natural dentition (excluding third molars) No history of occlusal rehabilitation or major prosthodontic treatment
Who cannot join
- Patients with missing teeth (excluding third molars) Patients with bruxism or other parafunctional habits History of orthodontic treatment in the past 2 years Inability to cooperate with diagnostic procedures patient below 18 years old
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Accuracy of Diagnostic Mounting With Jaw Tracking Device Versus Conventional Mounting Technique on Occlusal Contact Points in Dentate Patients: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
This study compares two methods used to measure how teeth come together (occlusal contacts) in patients who have natural teeth (dentate patients). The first method uses a modern jaw tracking device, while the second relies on the conventional mounting technique. The goal is to determine which method is more accurate for diagnosing bite alignment and contact points. This is a diagnostic test accuracy study, meaning it focuses on evaluating how well each technique performs in identifying the correct occlusal contacts.
Read the detailed description
This study is a diagnostic test accuracy investigation aimed at comparing the precision of two different methods for diagnostic mounting in evaluating occlusal contact points in dentate patients (patients with natural teeth).
The two mounting techniques being compared are:
Jaw Tracking Device-Based Mounting This is a digital approach that utilizes a jaw tracking system to record the patient's mandibular movements accurately. The device captures dynamic jaw positions in real time, allowing for precise simulation of the patient's occlusion on an articulator or in a digital environment.
Conventional Mounting Technique This is the traditional, manual method using mechanical articulators. It typically involves facebow transfer and static bite records to mount the maxillary and mandibular casts in the assumed position. While widely used, this method may be prone to human error and variability.
The primary objective of the study is to assess and compare the accuracy of these two mounting techniques by examining how closely each one replicates the actual occlusal contact points observed intraorally. Occlusal contacts are critical in diagnosing and planning treatments in prosthodontics, orthodontics, and restorative dentistry.
By evaluating these contacts using both methods, the study aims to determine:
Which technique provides a more accurate representation of the patient's true occlusion.
The potential clinical implications of using a jaw tracking device over conventional methods.
Whether digital methods can improve diagnostic reliability and treatment outcomes in daily dental practice.
This study is expected to contribute to the growing body of evidence supporting digital technologies in dentistry, offering insights into their clinical accuracy and potential to replace or supplement traditional techniques.
- Conditions
- Jaw Tracking
- Being tested
- Jaw Tracking Device
- Keywords
- Diagnostic Mounting, Jaw Tracking Device, Conventional Mounting Technique, Occlusal Contact Points
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Jaw Tracking DeviceDevice
A jaw tracking device is a digital tool that records real-time jaw movements to accurately analyze occlusion and assist in virtual model mounting.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Mounting Technique | Experimental | Not described Receives: Device: Jaw Tracking Device |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Accuracy of occlusal contact point detection as measured by comparing the contact points obtained from each mounting technique (jaw tracking device vs. conventional mounting) with the clinical intraoral occlusal contacts observed using articulating paper
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Oct 2025
- Study start15 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion15 Jan 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Feb 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Jaw TrackingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 18 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Omer Abdelmagid
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Omer Abdelmagid, Cairo University
- Investigators
- Nouran A Abdel Nabi, Professor, Study director, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07203703
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 14422022455531
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 25 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 2 Oct 2025
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: study protocol and statistical analysis
Publications
Tejo SK, Kumar AG, Kattimani VS, Desai PD, Nalla S, Chaitanya K K. A comparative evaluation of dimensional stability of three types of interocclusal recording materials-an in-vitro multi-centre study. Head Face Med. 2012 Oct 5;8:27. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-8-27.
PubMed 23039395Rohrle O, Waddell JN, Foster KD, Saini H, Pullan AJ. Using a motion-capture system to record dynamic articulation for application in CAD/CAM software. J Prosthodont. 2009 Dec;18(8):703-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00510.x. Epub 2009 Sep 14.
PubMed 19754645Pieper R. Digital impressions--easier than ever. Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12(1):47-52. English, German.
PubMed 19213360Kurbad A. Impression-free production techniques. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):59-66. English, German.
PubMed 21657126Kordass B. Clinical dental CAD/CAM--qualification for tomorrow's networked dentistry. Int J Comput Dent. 2010;13(1):3-6. No abstract available. English, German.
PubMed 20481287de Carvalho Ode T. A new fully adjustable articulator system and procedure. J Prosthet Dent. 1998 Sep;80(3):376-86. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70141-6.
PubMed 9760374
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Oct 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Accuracy of Diagnostic Mounting With Jaw Tracking Device Versus Conventional Mounting Technique on Occlusal Contact Points in Dentate Patients: A Diagnostic Test Accuracy Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07203703
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 14422022455531
- Conditions
- Jaw Tracking
- Keywords
- Diagnostic Mounting, Jaw Tracking Device, Conventional Mounting Technique, Occlusal Contact Points
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 18 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Omer AbdelmagidUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jan 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Feb 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 2 Oct 2025 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study compares two methods used to measure how teeth come together (occlusal contacts) in patients who have natural teeth (dentate patients). The first method uses a modern jaw tracking device, while the second relies on the conventional mounting technique. The goal is to determine which method is more accurate for diagnosing bite alignment and contact points. This is a diagnostic test accuracy study, meaning it focuses on evaluating how well each technique performs in identifying the correct occlusal contacts.
Detailed description
This study is a diagnostic test accuracy investigation aimed at comparing the precision of two different methods for diagnostic mounting in evaluating occlusal contact points in dentate patients (patients with natural teeth).
The two mounting techniques being compared are:
Jaw Tracking Device-Based Mounting This is a digital approach that utilizes a jaw tracking system to record the patient's mandibular movements accurately. The device captures dynamic jaw positions in real time, allowing for precise simulation of the patient's occlusion on an articulator or in a digital environment.
Conventional Mounting Technique This is the traditional, manual method using mechanical articulators. It typically involves facebow transfer and static bite records to mount the maxillary and mandibular casts in the assumed position. While widely used, this method may be prone to human error and variability.
The primary objective of the study is to assess and compare the accuracy of these two mounting techniques by examining how closely each one replicates the actual occlusal contact points observed intraorally. Occlusal contacts are critical in diagnosing and planning treatments in prosthodontics, orthodontics, and restorative dentistry.
By evaluating these contacts using both methods, the study aims to determine:
Which technique provides a more accurate representation of the patient's true occlusion.
The potential clinical implications of using a jaw tracking device over conventional methods.
Whether digital methods can improve diagnostic reliability and treatment outcomes in daily dental practice.
This study is expected to contribute to the growing body of evidence supporting digital technologies in dentistry, offering insights into their clinical accuracy and potential to replace or supplement traditional techniques.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Mounting Technique | Experimental | Device: Jaw Tracking Device |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 60 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients aged 18 to 60 years Presence of full natural dentition (excluding third molars) No history of occlusal rehabilitation or major prosthodontic treatment
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients with missing teeth (excluding third molars) Patients with bruxism or other parafunctional habits History of orthodontic treatment in the past 2 years Inability to cooperate with diagnostic procedures patient below 18 years old
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Jaw Tracking DeviceA jaw tracking device is a digital tool that records real-time jaw movements to accurately analyze occlusion and assist in virtual model mounting. | Device | Conventional Mounting Technique |
Primary outcome
Accuracy of occlusal contact point detection as measured by comparing the contact points obtained from each mounting technique (jaw tracking device vs. conventional mounting) with the clinical intraoral occlusal contacts observed using articulating paper
Time frame: 3 months
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Oct 2025.
- Results publication: PubMed 23039395Tejo SK, Kumar AG, Kattimani VS, Desai PD, Nalla S, Chaitanya K K. A comparative evaluation of dimensional stability of three types of interocclusal recording materials-an in-vitro multi-centre study. Head Face Med. 2012 Oct 5;8:27. doi: 10.1186/1746-160X-8-27.
- Results publication: PubMed 19754645Rohrle O, Waddell JN, Foster KD, Saini H, Pullan AJ. Using a motion-capture system to record dynamic articulation for application in CAD/CAM software. J Prosthodont. 2009 Dec;18(8):703-10. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00510.x. Epub 2009 Sep 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 19213360Pieper R. Digital impressions--easier than ever. Int J Comput Dent. 2009;12(1):47-52. English, German.
- Results publication: PubMed 21657126Kurbad A. Impression-free production techniques. Int J Comput Dent. 2011;14(1):59-66. English, German.
- Results publication: PubMed 20481287Kordass B. Clinical dental CAD/CAM--qualification for tomorrow's networked dentistry. Int J Comput Dent. 2010;13(1):3-6. No abstract available. English, German.
- Results publication: PubMed 9760374de Carvalho Ode T. A new fully adjustable articulator system and procedure. J Prosthet Dent. 1998 Sep;80(3):376-86. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3913(98)70141-6.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. study protocol and statistical analysis
Related trials for Jaw Tracking
Recruiting
Dynamic vs. Static Jaw Relations in Implant-Supported Prostheses: Chewing Efficiency
Chewing Efficiency in Completely Edentulous Patients Rehabilitated With Implant-Supported Full-Arch Prostheses
Recruiting
Jaw Tracking Impact on Occlusion and Patient Outcomes in Maxillary Implant Restorations
Edentulism, Complete Maxillary Edentulism
Enrolling by invitation
Occlusal Contact Registration Using Jaw Tracking Device Versus Articulating Paper at Different Head Positions
Healthy Adult, Between 20-25 Years Old
RecruitingObservational study
Assessing Symptom and Mood Dynamics in Pain Using the Smartphone Application SOMA
Chronic Pain, Acute Pain
Not yet recruiting
Accuracy of Centric Relation Recording: Conventional to Optical
Centric Relation Registration
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Nouran A Abdel Nabi, Professor study director
Cairo University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Jaw Tracking Device in people with Jaw Tracking, run by Omer Abdelmagid.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Oct 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Omer A Alawad, Prosthodontic resident (+201556143338, omer.elawad@dentistry.cu.edu.eg), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Accuracy of occlusal contact point detection as measured by comparing the contact points obtained from each mounting technique (jaw tracking device vs. conventional mounting) with the clinical intraoral occlusal contacts observed using articulating paper (time frame: 3 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07203703, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Oct 2025.