Cargando…
Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression
It is of interest to compare the accuracy of three different impression techniques for a single tooth impression. We used 3 groups with 15 samples each in this study. Group 1: Putty and light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 2: Monophase and extra light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 3:...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Biomedical Informatics
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8600204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34938011 http://dx.doi.org/10.6026/973206300161105 |
_version_ | 1784601100634030080 |
---|---|
author | Merchant, Aman Maiti, Subhabrata Ashok, V Ganapathy, Dhanraj M |
author_facet | Merchant, Aman Maiti, Subhabrata Ashok, V Ganapathy, Dhanraj M |
author_sort | Merchant, Aman |
collection | PubMed |
description | It is of interest to compare the accuracy of three different impression techniques for a single tooth impression. We used 3 groups with 15 samples each in this study. Group 1: Putty and light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 2: Monophase and extra light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 3: Matrix impression technique. 15 impressions were taken of a prepared tooth on a typodont with each technique. The dimensions of the casts poured from these impression techniques were compared with the control typodont tooth. Data analysis shows that the matrix impression technique gave the best results in terms of dimensional study followed by monophase and extra light body impression technique and putty and light body impression technique gave the least accurate results. The results show that there is a statistically significant difference between the three impression techniques in terms of dimensional stability. Data analysis shows that the matrix impression technique gave the best results in terms of dimensional study followed by monophase and extra light body impression technique and putty and light body impression technique gave the least accurate results. The variations between the groups are within acceptable limits. Hence, it can be concluded that all the impression techniques will result in adequate dimensional stability and can be used in clinical scenarios. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8600204 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Biomedical Informatics |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86002042021-12-21 Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression Merchant, Aman Maiti, Subhabrata Ashok, V Ganapathy, Dhanraj M Bioinformation Research Article It is of interest to compare the accuracy of three different impression techniques for a single tooth impression. We used 3 groups with 15 samples each in this study. Group 1: Putty and light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 2: Monophase and extra light body in a sectional stock tray; Group 3: Matrix impression technique. 15 impressions were taken of a prepared tooth on a typodont with each technique. The dimensions of the casts poured from these impression techniques were compared with the control typodont tooth. Data analysis shows that the matrix impression technique gave the best results in terms of dimensional study followed by monophase and extra light body impression technique and putty and light body impression technique gave the least accurate results. The results show that there is a statistically significant difference between the three impression techniques in terms of dimensional stability. Data analysis shows that the matrix impression technique gave the best results in terms of dimensional study followed by monophase and extra light body impression technique and putty and light body impression technique gave the least accurate results. The variations between the groups are within acceptable limits. Hence, it can be concluded that all the impression techniques will result in adequate dimensional stability and can be used in clinical scenarios. Biomedical Informatics 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8600204/ /pubmed/34938011 http://dx.doi.org/10.6026/973206300161105 Text en © 2020 Biomedical Informatics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. This is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Merchant, Aman Maiti, Subhabrata Ashok, V Ganapathy, Dhanraj M Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title | Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title_full | Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title_fullStr | Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title_short | Comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
title_sort | comparative analysis of different impression techniques in relation to single tooth impression |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8600204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34938011 http://dx.doi.org/10.6026/973206300161105 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT merchantaman comparativeanalysisofdifferentimpressiontechniquesinrelationtosingletoothimpression AT maitisubhabrata comparativeanalysisofdifferentimpressiontechniquesinrelationtosingletoothimpression AT ashokv comparativeanalysisofdifferentimpressiontechniquesinrelationtosingletoothimpression AT ganapathydhanrajm comparativeanalysisofdifferentimpressiontechniquesinrelationtosingletoothimpression |