You are in the accessibility menu

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/76653
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorde Avila, Erica Dorigatti-
dc.contributor.authorBarros, Luiz Antônio Borelli-
dc.contributor.authorDel'Acqua, Marcelo Antonialli-
dc.contributor.authorCastanharo, Sabrina Maria-
dc.contributor.authorMollo Jr., Francisco de Assis-
dc.date.accessioned2014-05-27T11:30:45Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-10-25T18:54:29Z-
dc.date.available2014-05-27T11:30:45Z-
dc.date.available2016-10-25T18:54:29Z-
dc.date.issued2013-09-27-
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpor.2013.07.001-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Prosthodontic Research.-
dc.identifier.issn1883-1958-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/76653-
dc.identifier.urihttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/76653-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: This in vitro study compared the dimensional accuracy of stone index (I) and three impression techniques: tapered impression copings (T), squared impression copings (S) and modified squared impression copings (MS) for implant-supported prostheses. 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 two metal stock trays (open and closed tray). Four groups (I, T, S and MS) were tested (n = 5). A metallic framework was seated on each of the casts, one abutment screw was tightened, and the gap between the analog of implant and the framework was measured with a stereomicroscope. The groups' measurements (80 gap values) were analyzed using software (LeicaQWin - Leica Imaging Systems Ltd.) that received the images of a video camera coupled to a Leica stereomicroscope at 100× magnification. The results were statistically analyzed with Kruskal-Wallis One Way ANOVA on Ranks test followed by Dunn's Method, 0.05. Results: The mean values of abutment/framework interface gaps were: Master Cast = 32 μm (SD 2); Group I = 45 μm (SD 3); Group T = 78 μm (SD 25); Group S = 134 μm (SD 30); Group MS = 143 μm (SD 27). No significant difference was detected among Index and Master Cast (P = .05). Conclusion: Under the limitations of this study, it could be suggested that a more accurate working cast is possible using tapered impression copings techniques and stone index. © 2013 Japan Prosthodontic Society.en
dc.language.isoeng-
dc.sourceScopus-
dc.subjectDental implant-
dc.subjectImpression material-
dc.subjectImpression technique-
dc.subjectTransfer coping-
dc.titleComparison of the accuracy for three dental impression techniques and index: An in vitro studyen
dc.typeoutro-
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jpor.2013.07.001-
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Prosthodontic Research-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84884525833-
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.