Background/aim: This study aims to evaluate and compare the impact absorption capacities of thermoformed ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) mouthguards and 3D-printed polyolefin mouthguards used in sports dentistry applications. The objective is to determine whether 3D-printed polyolefin mouthguards offer superior impact toughness compared to traditional EVA mouthguards commonly used in sports settings.
Materials And Methods: Six material samples were assessed: five pressure-formed EVA mouthguards (PolyShok, Buffalo Dental, Erkoflex, Proform, and Drufosoft) and one 3D-printed synthetic polymer (polyolefin).