STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Passive fit of implant-supported-prosthesis frameworks has been suggested as a prerequisite for successful long-term osseointegration. However, there are no scientific guidelines as to what is passive fit and how to achieve and measure it. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to discuss passive fit and to review the various clinical methods that have been suggested for evaluating implant framework fit.Methods. The dental literature was reviewed to identify the clinical methods that have been used to evaluate implant framework fit. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested levels of passive fit are empirical. Numerous techniques have been advocated to evaluate the prosthesis-implant interface, but none individually provides objective results. It is suggested that clinicians use a combination of the available methods to minimize misfits.
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Passive fit of implant-supported-prosthesis frameworks has been suggested as a prerequisite for successful long-term osseointegration. However, there are no scientific guidelines as to what is passive fit and how to achieve and measure it. PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to discuss passive fit and to review the various clinical methods that have been suggested for evaluating implant framework fit.Methods. The dental literature was reviewed to identify the clinical methods that have been used to evaluate implant framework fit. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested levels of passive fit are empirical. Numerous techniques have been advocated to evaluate the prosthesis-implant interface, but none individually provides objective results. It is suggested that clinicians use a combination of the available methods to minimize misfits.