This invention relates to a teether.
Infants have been observed for centuries biting on all types of objects during the period known as “teething”. This has been interpreted as a way of “relieving” the pain presumed associated with the process. As teething typically occurs during infant ages 5 months to 24 months, the pressure areas may be the gum pads (alveolar ridges), the erupting or newly erupted teeth, or a combination of both teeth and gums. A “teether” is a device that is designed to be chewed on by an infant to address teething-related issues.
This invention features a biologic response teether. The inventive biologic-designed teether distorts in response to the biting pressure of the infant, and returns to the original shape. Areas of the teether conform to different requirements of bite force depending on teether position in relation to the gums and newly erupted teeth. “Suckling bite forces” in the neonate, infant and toddler are important, in that mechanical forces and condylar loading account for development of cartilage in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) as well as the anatomic shape of the articular eminence. Further, bite forces against the alveolar ridge have led to complications with the development of the primary incisors, in the observation of hypoplastic defects due to excessive pressures (from laryngoscopes or oral intubations) against the alveolar ridge.
The inventive biologic-designed teether responds to these different conditions and remains fully controllable by the bite force generated by the infant, e.g., moderating bite force pressure results in moderating teether response. Greater bite force accomplishes more directed pressure on the biting surfaces of the mouth. Lower biting forces disperse the pressure. The infant can choose an appropriate teether location in the mouth, an appropriate location on the teether, an appropriate bite force, and an appropriate bite angle to accomplish a desired result, using feedback as necessary to vary the locations, bite force and bite angle.
The biologic distortion, which is a response to the infant bite force, can be accomplished at least in part by the use of a hard rigid polymer inner core of regular or varying thickness, and a second compressible lower durometer material, regular or varying in thickness, acting as a full or partial covering layer. In another embodiment that can accomplish similar results in terms of development of the TMJ, the lower durometer material is the core and the covering is the higher durometer material. In one embodiment the teether has two mouth-engageable ends and a center stabilizing shield. Either of the ends may also serve a dual function as a handle for the mother or infant's grasp.
Bite force in infants and children increases with age. The differences in bite force can be accommodated herein at least in part by design of the internal component of the teether (e.g., hollow core, catacomb (honeycombed or chambered) core, core and/or covering material (such as silicone, elastomeric, or urethane like material), core thickness). There is a relationship between bite force, muscle development and muscle mass.
The maximum velocity of TMJ eminence development occurs prior to 3 years of age. This anatomic structure of the jaw affects the functioning of the jaw. Between birth and 3 years the angle of growth will double. The angle of different embodiments of the inventive teether ridges can be designed to reflect this change. A significant part of this growth and change in the TMJ eminence angle occurs prior to the completion of the eruption of the second primary molars (age 24-36 months) and during the teething phase (6-36 months). The stages of designs of the inventive teether reflect this.
Corresponding to the increase in chewing efficiency (from birth to 3 years) a unilateral occlusal motion has evolved and masticatory cycles are shaped by sensory feedback. The inventive teether shape is designed to enhance this evolving development. The suckling motor pattern resembles that of mastication suggesting that the transition is gradual during postnatal development. The inventive teether changes among the different designs reflect this gradual transition. Muscle activity is different during chewing, nipple attachment (stretching) and rhythmic sucking. The inventive teether is designed to this progression. The development of the occlusion triggers the masticatory motor pattern. The inventive teether design aids in development of masticatory motor skills because it is designed to be used during the stages of tooth eruption.
The inventive teether can be embodied in various designs that in part capture these aspects of design that are most appropriate for the age or stage of development of the child, typically one that mimics feeding progression. Such development stages may include the following groups: Stage one—liquids (mostly sucking and oral positioning development). Stage two—soft solids (special relations and starting development of the grinding of food and swallow, early speech development). Stage three—solids (chew and focus on tempromandibular joint (TMJ) development and speech development).
For example, the various embodiments of the invention can include traditional teether shapes, or unique or non-traditional shapes. The width and thickness of biting surfaces vary according to tolerance at each developmental stage. The thickness of the portions of the teether that are designed to be bitten will typically change by the appropriate amount according to the age/stage of development of the child. Generally this incremental change in thickness is a 1-2 mm increase per stage, e.g., stage one may be 6-8 mm thick, stage two 8-11 mm thick, and stage three 11-13 mm thick.
The teether mimics the necessity for directed and disbursed forces which provide the mechanical load for proper TMJ, oral facial muscle development, support and stabilize the mandibular arch and support normal oral myofunction. The teether was developed with the proper ridge and valley angles consistent with jaw function and growth. Different stages allow for the different “squeeze loads” ideally suited for the proper forces needed to enhance TMJ/jaw development. The teether responds to the infant's bite; it distributes the forces as the infant determines and the infant applies the just right biting force. All stages of the teether allow the infant to produce different “squeeze loads” providing the sensory feedback for pain relief. The teether is designed to encourage the proper functional stimulation that will support articulatory speech development. The shield is designed to support and position the teether and enhances the development of the important “lip seal” function.
One embodiment of the invention includes a biologic response teether comprising a shield, and a generally “T”-shaped bite portion projecting from the shield and comprising a relatively hard inner core at least partially covered by a softer outer layer. The inner core defines an elongated stem closest to the shield, and two arms that are transverse to the stem. The stem may define at least one protuberance (typically at about the stem midpoint), and each arm preferably defines at least one protuberance. The outer layer may have a constant or a variable thickness. Each arm may define a protuberance near the two distal ends of the arm (farthest from the stem). The inner core may be generally flat, and of uniform thickness, and the protuberances may be in the outer layer. The stem may be curved or straight along its length. The arms may or may not have the same length. The arms may lie along a curve that approximates the curve of the dental arch so that the infant can bite on the arms at the locations of both the incisors and the molars (either before or after eruption). The distance from the end of one arm to the closest location on the shield may differ from the distance from the end of the other arm to the closest location on the shield, to allow different positioning of the ends of the arms in the mouth with the shield outside of the mouth, typically against the lips. A double-ended version includes two such “T”-shaped portions, which may or may not be the same shape. One such portion typically presents a different hardness than the other so that the infant has a hardness choice in a single teether.
Another embodiment of the invention includes a hub member, a ring member coupled to the hub member, a plurality of generally planar teething members mounted to the ring via a through-hole between the two faces of the teething members so as to movable relative to the ring. At least one teething member defines a plurality of elongated ridges and valleys, the ridges at angles of from about 5 degrees to about 40 degrees from the face of the at least one teething member, and at least one other teething member defining a generally flat surface interrupted by a series of through holes. Each teething member may define a different thickness than the other teething members.
Yet another embodiment features a biologic response teether comprising a shield, an annular first teething member projecting from one side of the shield, and an arch-shaped second teething member projecting from the other side of the shield and defining a pair of curved arms projecting away from the shield. Each arm of the second teething member may define generally flat upper and lower surfaces with a depression in each surface proximate the ends of each of the arms. The first teething member may define generally flat upper and lower surfaces with a ridge in each surface proximate the location furthest from the shield. The first and second teething members may each comprise a relatively soft inner core at least partially covered by a harder outer layer.
Other objects, features and advantages will occur to those skilled in the art from the following description of preferred embodiments and the accompanying drawings, in which:
The embodiment 10 shown in
The annular ring feature 20 is a circle of at least 14 mm inner diameter and width around 6 mm, but could also be an ellipse ranging from minor axis (arranged in the anterior/posterior direction) of 14 mm-20 mm and major axis of 25-40 mm allowing the lips to “seal” or surround the feature. Sealing is important for developing speech.
Embodiment 10 may have a soft inner core 30 (hardness of Shore 25-35 A) with a harder outer cover 32 (hardness 50-60 A). The very slight grooves 44, 46 toward ends 48 and 47 of bite surfaces on the u-shaped feature is for alignment of gums as well as place to hold teething gel. Ring-side 20 has ridge 22 for additional contrasting bite surface. The hard shield (solid) 12 is designed with curvature for facial alignment while allowing for open airy feel on child's face, in part accomplished with openings 13 and 14. The grooves (46, 44) and ridges (22) are preferably on both the upper 42 and lower 43 surfaces of teether 10. Features such as different shape through-holes 52 and 53 in core 30 will fill with overmolded material to assist in a tight bond between the core and the overmolded outer layer.
These “keys” 86, 88 and 90 are movable along ring 82 and include valleys angled to develop TMJ growth for the three stages, raised ridges, larger raised “plateau” surfaces, and multi-thickness designs (see the three different thicknesses in the side view of
One portion 180 may be made only from harder 80 A material 190, with ridge and valley features that meet proper angles for that stage of development. In this case the opposing portion 170 has a core of material 190 with an overmolded layer 192 which is a softer 50-60 A material. Portion 170 defines an enlarged raised plateau 176, and the sidewalls of the plateau form angled surfaces as well. Layer 192 can be either a smooth surface over a properly ridged core 190, or a ridged pattern over a smooth core 190. The shape of cross-members 169 and 168 are designed to correspond to the arch of the gum-line, allowing the child to safely access anterior and posterior teeth with different bite forces and sensations at the same time, which can both develop the TMJ and alleviate pain at the same time. The shape is illustrated by outer arch curve 131 and arch bisecting curve 132,
The material of the core 190 can be a high durometer thermoplastic, PEBAX, urethane or silicone with a hardness of approximately 70 D or above, while the outer layer may be overmolded on the inner core and comprise a lower durometer theramoplastic, PEBAX, urethane or silicone with a hardness of approximately 40 D or lower; other hardnesses are set forth above. The outer layer can be contoured with peaks and valleys. This allows for the dissipative force of the bite or a soothing “gumming” effect, depending on how the child feels and how teether 150 is positioned in the mouth. The overall shape of the cross-members that define the transverse portions of portions 170 and 180 are such as to allow them to fit along the contour of the gum ridge. Also, as can be seen in
The core is preferably flat, with essentially uniform thickness. However, in alternative embodiments not shown in the drawings, the core may have peaks and valleys. If the core has peaks and valleys, the outer layer is preferably of relatively uniform thickness, but need not be.
Fourth embodiment 200,
In all overmolded designs, a minimum of 1.25 mm of overmolded material should be used. This is for safety reasons. A dimension of less than 1.25 mm and any material softer than a 50-60 A silicone could lead to a safety hazard: the child could bite through.
The child can use natural feedback mechanisms (sensory comfort areas), such as relief from pain, to properly position the teether in the mouth in order to locate a desired surface of the teether against a desired area of the teeth and gums.
In other embodiments the inventive teether may be shaped more conventionally, for example as a teething ring, while still incorporating the inner core, outer covering and peaks and valleys, to respond to varying bite forces. Certain embodiments may be shaped to match the gum ridge completely, or a single rod to mimic a finger. In the case of a single rod, the peaks and valleys represent the hard knuckles and softer skin areas of a finger.
While the foregoing invention has been described in some detail for purposes of clarity and understanding, particular embodiments are to be considered as illustrative and not restrictive. It will be appreciated by one skilled in the art from a reading of this disclosure that certain changes in form or detail may be made without departing from the scope of the invention and are within the scope of the following claims. For example, features shown in some drawings and not others may be combined in different manners in accordance with the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
516561 | Bosch | Mar 1894 | A |
699757 | Howell | May 1902 | A |
2234137 | Hoover | Mar 1941 | A |
D160140 | Binney | Sep 1950 | S |
D197889 | Hass | Apr 1964 | S |
3601129 | Seidl | Aug 1971 | A |
4402321 | Berg | Sep 1983 | A |
4403613 | Panicci | Sep 1983 | A |
D280749 | Thomson et al. | Sep 1985 | S |
4569349 | McKee | Feb 1986 | A |
D290655 | Thomson et al. | Jun 1987 | S |
4898171 | Moss | Feb 1990 | A |
4898291 | Sailors | Feb 1990 | A |
4986751 | Bergersen | Jan 1991 | A |
D314621 | Bernstein et al. | Feb 1991 | S |
5013320 | Orpaz | May 1991 | A |
5133740 | Kussick | Jul 1992 | A |
5211656 | Maddocks | May 1993 | A |
D336520 | McDaniel | Jun 1993 | S |
D339196 | Spence, Jr. | Sep 1993 | S |
5259762 | Farrell | Nov 1993 | A |
5334218 | Johnson | Aug 1994 | A |
5342398 | Sun | Aug 1994 | A |
5403349 | Rohrig | Apr 1995 | A |
D380269 | Mendes | Jun 1997 | S |
D395515 | Fletcher | Jun 1998 | S |
D395516 | Fletcher | Jun 1998 | S |
5814074 | Branam | Sep 1998 | A |
D403072 | Rogers Huante | Dec 1998 | S |
5843128 | Wexler | Dec 1998 | A |
5993413 | Aaltonen et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6056774 | Johansen et al. | May 2000 | A |
6063107 | Wexler | May 2000 | A |
6080186 | Pedersen et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
D430300 | Anthony, Jr. | Aug 2000 | S |
D453401 | Kaplan | Feb 2002 | S |
D457966 | Espemar | May 2002 | S |
6436125 | Rhoads | Aug 2002 | B1 |
D480147 | Sanbrook et al. | Sep 2003 | S |
6773451 | Dussere | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6837037 | Willinger | Jan 2005 | B2 |
7029491 | Davis | Apr 2006 | B2 |
D547455 | Greenberg | Jul 2007 | S |
7294141 | Bergersen | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7789894 | Rohrig | Sep 2010 | B2 |
7883530 | Tesini | Feb 2011 | B2 |
8057512 | Gibson | Nov 2011 | B1 |
D685485 | Swern et al. | Jul 2013 | S |
D695411 | Swern et al. | Dec 2013 | S |
20020077663 | Hinshaw | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030050669 | Branam | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030163162 | Uehara | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030176891 | Frederic | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20050080456 | Sanbrook et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20060036285 | Davis | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20070016253 | Doherty et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070112386 | Branam | May 2007 | A1 |
20070238063 | Tesini et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080188894 | Hakim | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20090018582 | Ishikawa et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090192547 | Gates | Jul 2009 | A1 |
20100063543 | Moses et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 536 636 | Apr 1993 | EP |
2595046 | Sep 1987 | FR |
WO 8603402 | Jun 1986 | WO |
WO 9911219 | Mar 1999 | WO |
Entry |
---|
International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Mar. 3, 2011 in corresponding PCT application No. PCT/US2009/054125. |
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority dated Mar. 22, 2010 in corresponding PCT application No. PCT/US2009/054125. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110160769 A1 | Jun 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61089606 | Aug 2008 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | PCT/US2009/054125 | Aug 2009 | US |
Child | 13028506 | US |