Limits...
Effect of variation of impression material combinations, dual arch tray types, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of working dies: “ An in vitro study ”

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aims:: To evaluate the accuracy of dies made from dual arch impressions using different sectional dual arch trays, combinations of elastomeric impression materials, and the sequence of pour of dies.

Subjects and methods:: The dual arch impression materials were grouped into three groups depending on the combination of impression materials used and each group is subdivided into four subgroups. A sample size of 8 in each subgroup yielding a total 96 impressions will be made into three groups of 32 each (Group I, II, and III). Group I constitute impressions made using monophase (M) impression material, Group II constitute impressions made using combination of heavy body and light body (HL), and Group III constitute impressions made using combination of putty and light body (PL). Dies obtained were evaluated with a travelling microscope to measure the buccolingual width of the tooth at the margin by using the sharp corners of the notches as reference points.

Statistical analysis used:: Descriptive analysis namely mean and standard deviation, one-way analysis of variance test.

Results:: The results obtained in this study indicate that though not statistically significant, the metal dual arch trays performed better when compared to the plastic trays in reproducing die dimensions.

Conclusions:: From the results obtained, dies poured from combination of heavy body and light body impressions using plastic or metal dual arch trays showed least variation in bucco-lingual dimension from master model.

No MeSH data available.


Dual arch impressions and poured casts of three groups
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837785&req=5

Figure 6: Dual arch impressions and poured casts of three groups

Mentions: For the dual arch impressions, one side of the impression was poured first and allowed to set for 1 h before the other side was poured with die stone. The casts which were obtained by pouring the preparation side of the impression first and then the counter impression were designated as preparation side casts. The casts obtained by pouring the counter side (opposing side) first and then the preparation side were called the opposing side casts. All casts were allowed to set for 24 h at room temperature before removal from the impressions [Figure 6].[1011]


Effect of variation of impression material combinations, dual arch tray types, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of working dies: “ An in vitro study ”
Dual arch impressions and poured casts of three groups
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4837785&req=5

Figure 6: Dual arch impressions and poured casts of three groups
Mentions: For the dual arch impressions, one side of the impression was poured first and allowed to set for 1 h before the other side was poured with die stone. The casts which were obtained by pouring the preparation side of the impression first and then the counter impression were designated as preparation side casts. The casts obtained by pouring the counter side (opposing side) first and then the preparation side were called the opposing side casts. All casts were allowed to set for 24 h at room temperature before removal from the impressions [Figure 6].[1011]

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

Aims:: To evaluate the accuracy of dies made from dual arch impressions using different sectional dual arch trays, combinations of elastomeric impression materials, and the sequence of pour of dies.

Subjects and methods:: The dual arch impression materials were grouped into three groups depending on the combination of impression materials used and each group is subdivided into four subgroups. A sample size of 8 in each subgroup yielding a total 96 impressions will be made into three groups of 32 each (Group I, II, and III). Group I constitute impressions made using monophase (M) impression material, Group II constitute impressions made using combination of heavy body and light body (HL), and Group III constitute impressions made using combination of putty and light body (PL). Dies obtained were evaluated with a travelling microscope to measure the buccolingual width of the tooth at the margin by using the sharp corners of the notches as reference points.

Statistical analysis used:: Descriptive analysis namely mean and standard deviation, one-way analysis of variance test.

Results:: The results obtained in this study indicate that though not statistically significant, the metal dual arch trays performed better when compared to the plastic trays in reproducing die dimensions.

Conclusions:: From the results obtained, dies poured from combination of heavy body and light body impressions using plastic or metal dual arch trays showed least variation in bucco-lingual dimension from master model.

No MeSH data available.