PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “DENTAL IMPRESSION MATERIALS”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 1,225 records · Page 68Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Clinical significance of surface activation of silicone impression materials.

OBJECTIVES: Surface activation of silicone impression materials enhances impression accuracy as well as the quality of stone casts. This study examined the relation between impression quality and the hydrophilicity of silicone impression materials used in a two-stage putty and wash technique. METHODS: The study included 14 silicone impression materials with and without surface activation. The contact angles of the light body materials were measured using deionised water. Free surface energies were calculated. A total of 140 impressions of wet intact permanent molar teeth were examined for definition of the gingival sulcus reproduction and then classified in a quality ranking. The percentage of the sulcus reproduction ability of each material was calculated from the sulcus depths of cross-sectioned resin casts from the impressions and clinically measured sulcus depths. RESULTS: Free surface energies (mJ/m2) of hydrophobic materials (contact angle > 90 degrees) ranged from 16.8 to 26.8 mJ/m2. Surface activated materials (contact angle < 90 degrees) exhibited free surface energies from 38.1 to 55.7 mJ/m2. Not all materials described as surface activated showed hydrophilic properties. Medians of impression quality ranking ranged from 1.75 (best) to 13.25 (worst), mean sulcus reproduction ranged from 30 to 52%. Significant differences (P < 0.05) in quality ranking and sulcus reproduction were found between certain materials but correlations were found neither between sulcus reproduction and free surface energy nor between quality ranking and free surface energy. CONCLUSIONS: For clinical impression recording, surface activation seems to be of minor relevance, at least in the two-stage putty and wash technique investigated and is superimposed by other material properties.

Calcium Sulfate↗
PubMed1995

An in vivo investigation of seating and removal forces associated with recording impressions in dentate patients.

This in vivo study examined forces exerted during the recording of impressions of dentate maxillary arches. This study consisted of 10 subjects; four impression materials in metal stock trays and disposable plastic trays were used. The load rate and the maximum insertion and removal forces were measured with strain gauges mounted on the tray handles. The results indicated considerable variations in forces and load rates related to material, subject, and tray type. Lower forces were measured with the disposable trays. The greatest mean peak removal forces were 36.3 N with a metal tray/elastomer combination and 19.9 N with the same material used in a plastic tray.

Alginates↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Fine detail reproduction of very high viscosity poly(vinyl siloxane) impression materials.

Very high viscosity (putty) poly(vinyl siloxane) impression materials are used with both the conventional double-mix and single-mix putty/wash techniques. When the latter technique is used, portions of the impression of the prepared teeth may be made in the putty rather than the wash material. This study investigated the ability of ten different putty materials to reproduce fine detail. The American Dental Association stainless steel test die for Specification No. 19 was used. Two of the materials consistently reproduced the 20-microns groove. Three of the materials reproduced the 20-microns groove in one-half of the samples tested, while the remainder failed to do so.

Dental Impression Materials↗