Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ International Journa...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
International Journal of Oral Health Dentistry
Article . 2024 . Peer-reviewed
License: CC BY NC SA
Data sources: Crossref
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

Comparison of dimensional accuracy of digital impression technique versus conventional impression technique on parallel endosseous dental implants: An in vitro study

Authors: Varun Kumar; Shubham Talele; Jyotsna Seth;

Comparison of dimensional accuracy of digital impression technique versus conventional impression technique on parallel endosseous dental implants: An in vitro study

Abstract

To create an implant prosthesis that fits well, a precise implant impression is necessary. This in vitro study assessed the dimensional accuracy of open tray impressions vs digital impressions taken with an intraoral scanner for tracking the locations of parallel-placed endosseous implants.Two parallel endosseous implants were positioned in a mandibular customized model made up of epoxy resin at the first premolar sites. The inter-implant distance was measured using a Co-ordinate Measuring Machine (SIPCON SVI CNC 3D). Conventional open tray impressions were made using addition silicone, while digital impressions were captured with an intraoral scanner (CEREC OMNICAM). A total of 10 impressions were collected for both techniques. The inter-implant distance for both groups was measured using the analyzing tool in CEREC Dentsply Sirona software and compared with the CMM readings.The mean values of the two groups were compared using a Student's t-test, and statistical significance was established using a p-value threshold of less than 0.05. A p-value of 0.547 for the Open Tray group i.e more than 0.05—showed no statistical significance. When compared to other groups, the digital scan group showed statistically significant outcomes with a p-value of 0.031, which is less than 0.05.Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the results showed that digital impressions demonstrated significantly greater dimensional accuracy compared to conventional (open tray) impressions for parallel-placed endosseous implants.

Related Organizations
  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
gold