You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/16510
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDel'Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli-
dc.contributor.authorChavez, Alejandro Munoz-
dc.contributor.authorCompagnoni, Marco Antonio-
dc.contributor.authorMollo Junior, Francisco de Assis-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-20T13:46:36Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T17:00:17Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-20T13:46:36Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T17:00:17Z-
dc.date.issued2010-07-01-
dc.identifierhttp://www.quintpub.com/journals/omi/abstract.php?article_id=8418#.Ui9gzsbks_Y-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants. Hanover Park: Quintessence Publishing Co Inc, v. 25, n. 4, p. 715-721, 2010.-
dc.identifier.issn0882-2786-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/16510-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/16510-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of a stone index and of two impression techniques (squared impression copings and modified squared impression copings) for implant-supported prostheses. Materials and Methods: A master cast with four parallel implant-abutment analogs and a passive framework were fabricated. Vinyl polysiloxane impression material was used for all impressions with a metal stock tray. Three groups of impressions were tested (n = 5): index (1), squared (S), and modified squared (MS). The measurement method employed was just one titanium screw tightened to the framework. The measurements (60 gap values) were analyzed using software that received the images from a video camera coupled to a stereomicroscope at x 100 magnification. The results were evaluated statistically (analysis of variance, Holm-Sidak method, alpha = .05). Results: The mean abutment/framework interface gaps were: master cast = 31.63 mu m; group I = 45.25 mu m; group S = 96.14 mu m; group MS = 51.20 mu m. No significant difference was detected among the index and modified squared techniques (P = .05). Conclusion: Under the limitations of this study, the techniques modified squared and index generated more accurate casts than the squared technique. INT J ORAL MAXILLOFAC IMPLANTS 2010;25:715-721en
dc.format.extent715-721-
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.publisherQuintessence Publishing Co Inc-
dc.sourceWeb of Science-
dc.subjectdental implantsen
dc.subjectdental impression techniqueen
dc.subjectdental modelsen
dc.titleAccuracy of Impression Techniques for an Implant-Supported Prosthesisen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionAraraquara Univ Ctr UNIARA-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.description.affiliationAraraquara Univ Ctr UNIARA, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationSão Paulo State Univ, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.description.affiliationUnespSão Paulo State Univ, Araraquara Dent Sch, Dept Dent Mat & Prosthodont, São Paulo, Brazil-
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000281113300007-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito-
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Implants-
Appears in Collections:Artigos, TCCs, Teses e Dissertações da Unesp

There are no files associated with this item.
 

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.