Background: We developed a novel interlocking three-dimensional (3D) miniplate design with an adjustable configuration. As this device is new, surgeons must become familiar with its application. This study evaluated the usability and learning curves associated with the novel interlocking 3D miniplate for mandibular fracture fixation. Methods: The study participants, nine plastic surgeons, were asked to apply an interlocking 3D miniplate and a standard miniplate to polyurethane mandible models. The participants had completed the Basic Craniomaxillofacial Osteosynthesis course during residency and had operated on craniomaxillofacial fractures within the past 5 years. They were instructed to place the interlocking 3D miniplate three times and the standard miniplate once. We assessed the time required for implant placement, the comfort level of the surgeons, and the biomechanical stability of the plates. Biomechanical testing was conducted by subjecting the mandible to forces ranging from 10 to 90 N and the displacement was measured. Results: The results indicate increasing comfort with each attempt at placing the interlocking 3D miniplate, with a significant difference between the first and third attempts. Additionally, a reduction in application time was noted with repeated attempts, suggesting improved efficiency. Biomechanical tests showed comparable stability between the tested plates. Conclusion Multiple attempts at applying the interlocking 3D miniplate resulted in increased comfort and reduced application time. These findings indicate that, despite its novelty, the interlocking 3D miniplate is relatively straightforward to apply and has a short learning curve. However, surgeons must have specific qualifications to ensure proper training and minimize errors during placement.

Background: We developed a novel interlocking three-dimensional (3D) miniplate design with an adjustable configuration. As this device is new, surgeons must become familiar with its application. This study evaluated the usability and learning curves associated with the novel interlocking 3D miniplate for mandibular fracture fixation. Methods: The study participants, nine plastic surgeons, were asked to apply an interlocking 3D miniplate and a standard miniplate to polyurethane mandible models. The participants had completed the Basic Craniomaxillofacial Osteosynthesis course during residency and had operated on craniomaxillofacial fractures within the past 5 years. They were instructed to place the interlocking 3D miniplate three times and the standard miniplate once. We assessed the time required for implant placement, the comfort level of the surgeons, and the biomechanical stability of the plates. Biomechanical testing was conducted by subjecting the mandible to forces ranging from 10 to 90 N and the displacement was measured. Results: The results indicate increasing comfort with each attempt at placing the interlocking 3D miniplate, with a significant difference between the first and third attempts. Additionally, a reduction in application time was noted with repeated attempts, suggesting improved efficiency. Biomechanical tests showed comparable stability between the tested plates. Conclusion Multiple attempts at applying the interlocking 3D miniplate resulted in increased comfort and reduced application time. These findings indicate that, despite its novelty, the interlocking 3D miniplate is relatively straightforward to apply and has a short learning curve. However, surgeons must have specific qualifications to ensure proper training and minimize errors during placement.

Background: We developed a novel interlocking three-dimensional (3D) miniplate design with an adjustable configuration. As this device is new, surgeons must become familiar with its application. This study evaluated the usability and learning curves associated with the novel interlocking 3D miniplate for mandibular fracture fixation. Methods: The study participants, nine plastic surgeons, were asked to apply an interlocking 3D miniplate and a standard miniplate to polyurethane mandible models. The participants had completed the Basic Craniomaxillofacial Osteosynthesis course during residency and had operated on craniomaxillofacial fractures within the past 5 years. They were instructed to place the interlocking 3D miniplate three times and the standard miniplate once. We assessed the time required for implant placement, the comfort level of the surgeons, and the biomechanical stability of the plates. Biomechanical testing was conducted by subjecting the mandible to forces ranging from 10 to 90 N and the displacement was measured. Results: The results indicate increasing comfort with each attempt at placing the interlocking 3D miniplate, with a significant difference between the first and third attempts. Additionally, a reduction in application time was noted with repeated attempts, suggesting improved efficiency. Biomechanical tests showed comparable stability between the tested plates. Conclusion Multiple attempts at applying the interlocking 3D miniplate resulted in increased comfort and reduced application time. These findings indicate that, despite its novelty, the interlocking 3D miniplate is relatively straightforward to apply and has a short learning curve. However, surgeons must have specific qualifications to ensure proper training and minimize errors during placement.

Background: We developed a novel interlocking three-dimensional (3D) miniplate design with an adjustable configuration. As this device is new, surgeons must become familiar with its application. This study evaluated the usability and learning curves associated with the novel interlocking 3D miniplate for mandibular fracture fixation. Methods: The study participants, nine plastic surgeons, were asked to apply an interlocking 3D miniplate and a standard miniplate to polyurethane mandible models. The participants had completed the Basic Craniomaxillofacial Osteosynthesis course during residency and had operated on craniomaxillofacial fractures within the past 5 years. They were instructed to place the interlocking 3D miniplate three times and the standard miniplate once. We assessed the time required for implant placement, the comfort level of the surgeons, and the biomechanical stability of the plates. Biomechanical testing was conducted by subjecting the mandible to forces ranging from 10 to 90 N and the displacement was measured. Results: The results indicate increasing comfort with each attempt at placing the interlocking 3D miniplate, with a significant difference between the first and third attempts. Additionally, a reduction in application time was noted with repeated attempts, suggesting improved efficiency. Biomechanical tests showed comparable stability between the tested plates. Conclusion Multiple attempts at applying the interlocking 3D miniplate resulted in increased comfort and reduced application time. These findings indicate that, despite its novelty, the interlocking 3D miniplate is relatively straightforward to apply and has a short learning curve. However, surgeons must have specific qualifications to ensure proper training and minimize errors during placement.