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:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Merchant, Aman, Maiti, Subhabrata, Ashok, V, Ganapathy, Dhanraj M
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