Literature DB >> 3903109

Impression material thickness in stock and custom trays.

T J Bomberg, R A Hatch, W Hoffman.   

Abstract

This study did not examine the accuracy of the resultant impressions. Rather, the impression material thickness in impressions made using both the highly advocated custom acrylic resin tray and in the highly used manufactured stock tray was examined. Comparison between the material thickness at the prepared tooth area revealed a mean difference in material thickness of less than 1 mm. The question of the significance of this difference remains to be answered. If the difference is not significant in the success of the impression and the resultant casting, then there are several advantages in using the manufactured stock tray; the first is economy. The average cost of a custom acrylic full arch impression tray is $3.65, compared with an average cost of slightly over $0.30 for the stock tray. The second advantage is the convenience factor. Making a custom tray requires planning, study models, laboratory time, curing interval, and finishing time. In contrast, the stock tray can be selected, adapted, and used in a single visit for both anticipated and unanticipated situations. If the difference in material thickness is significant, the custom tray is indicated. However, attention to detail in making and inserting the tray in the mouth must be observed to maximize the benefits of the custom tray.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1985        PMID: 3903109     DOI: 10.1016/0022-3913(85)90278-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Dent        ISSN: 0022-3913            Impact factor:   3.426


  6 in total

1.  Dimensional accuracy of two rubber base impression materials as a function of spacer design and techniques in custom trays for fixed partial dentures.

Authors:  Pankaj Kaushik; R K Dhiman; Dinesh Kumar
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2013-08-02

2.  A Comparative Evaluation of the Linear Dimensional Accuracy of Four Impression Techniques using Polyether Impression Material.

Authors:  Smita Sara Manoj; K P Cherian; Vidya Chitre; Meena Aras
Journal:  J Indian Prosthodont Soc       Date:  2013-02-06

3.  A Comparison of Dimensional Accuracy of Addition Silicone of Different Consistencies with Two Different Spacer Designs - In-vitro Study.

Authors:  Suprabha Rathee; B Eswaran; Ma Eswaran; R Prabhu; Kr Geetha; Gp Krishna
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2014-07-20

4.  Accuracy of a separating foil impression using a novel polyolefin foil compared to a custom tray and a stock tray technique.

Authors:  Marie-Hélène Pastoret; Gabriel Krastl; Julia Bühler; Roland Weiger; Nicola Ursula Zitzmann
Journal:  J Adv Prosthodont       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 1.904

5.  Impression Making and Lab Work Authorization Forms in Fixed Prosthodontics: A Preclinical Exercise.

Authors:  Tarek El-Kerdani; Arthur Nimmo
Journal:  MedEdPORTAL       Date:  2016-11-09

6.  A comparative analysis of the accuracy of implant master casts fabricated from two different transfer impression techniques.

Authors:  Rupali Patil; Pankaj Kadam; Chetan Oswal; Seema Patil; Shweta Jajoo; Arati Gachake
Journal:  J Int Soc Prev Community Dent       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.