Clinical trial investigating success rates for polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impressions made with full-arch and dual-arch plastic trays

Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry

Volumn 103, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 13-22

  Johnson, Glen H ^a   Mancl, Lloyd A ^a   Schwedhelm, E Ricardo ^a   Verhoef, Douglas R ^a   Lepe, Xavier ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AQUASIL; BIOMEDICAL AND DENTAL MATERIALS; POLYVINYL DERIVATIVE; RESIN; SILOXANE;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL CARE; DENTAL IMPRESSION; EDENTULOUSNESS; HUMAN; IMPREGUM; INSTRUMENTATION; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TOOTH PROSTHESIS;

DENTAL IMPRESSION MATERIALS; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL MODELS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; HUMANS; JAW, EDENTULOUS; MANDIBLE; MAXILLA; OBSERVER VARIATION; POLYVINYLS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESINS, SYNTHETIC; SILOXANES;

EID: 73149118022     PISSN: 00223913     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0022-3913(09)60208-0     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. th ed. (2006), Elsevier, St. Louis 283-285
2. Christensen G.J. Ensuring accuracy and predictability with double-arch impressions. J Am Dent Assoc 139 (2008) 1123-1125
3. Ceyhan J.A., Johnson G.H., Lepe X., and Phillips K.M. A clinical study comparing the three-dimensional accuracy of a working die generated from two dual-arch trays and a complete-arch custom tray. J Prosthet Dent 90 (2003) 228-234
4. Johnson G.H., and Craig R.G. Accuracy of four types of impression materials compared with time of pour and a repeat pour of models. J Prosthet Dent 53 (1985) 484-490
5. Wadhwani C.P., Johnson G.H., Lepe X., and Raigrodski A.J. Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 93 (2005) 530-539
6. Kang A.H., Johnson G.H., Lepe X., and Wataha J.C. Accuracy of reformulated fast-set vinyl polysiloxane impression material using dual-arch trays. J Prosthet Dent 101 (2009) 332-341
7. Stewardson D.A. Trends in indirect dentistry: 5. Impression materials and techniques. Dent Update 32 (2005) 374-376 379-80, 382-4.
8. Blatz M.B., Sadan A., Burgess J.O., Mercante D., and Hoist S. Selected characteristics of a new polyvinyl siloxane impression material-a randomized clinical trial. Quintessence Int 36 (2005) 97-104
9. Beier U.S., Grunert I., Kulmer S., and Dumfahrt H. Quality of impressions using hydrophilic polyvinyl siloxane in a clinical study of 249 patients. Int J Prosthodont 20 (2007) 270-274
10. Luthardt R.G., Koch R., Rudolph H., and Walter M.H. Qualitative computer aided evaluation of dental impressions in vivo. Dent Mater 22 (2006) 69-76
11. Kugel G., Swift Jr. E.J., Sorensen J.A., Tucker J.H., and Dunne Jr. J.T. A prospective clinical evaluation of electronically mixed polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: results from the prosthetic "SuperStudy"-a consumer evaluation. Compend Contin Educ Dent Suppl (1999) S3-21
12. Winstanley R.B. Crown and bridge impressions-a comparison between the UK and a number of other countries. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent 7 (1999) 61-64
13. Radjaeipour G. Improving decision-making in restorations: evaluation of impressions and working casts. J Calif Dent Assoc 35 (2007) 637-640
14. Stackhouse Jr. J.A., Harris W.T., Mansour R.M., and Von Hagen S. A study of bubbles in a rubber elastomer manipulated under clinical conditions. J Prosthet Dent 57 (1987) 591-596
15. Christensen G.J. Laboratories want better impressions. J Am Dent Assoc 138 (2007) 527-529
16. Christensen G.J. Ensuring accuracy and predictability with double-arch impressions. J Am Dent Assoc 139 (2008) 1123-1125
17. Lane D.A., Randall R.C., Lane N.S., and Wilson N.H. A clinical trial to compare double-arch and complete-arch impression techniques in the provision of indirect restorations. J Prosthet Dent 89 (2003) 141-145
18. Small B.W. Impression success using the dual arch technique. Gen Dent 53 (2005) 396-397
19. Cox J.R., Brandt R.L., and Hughes H.J. A clinical pilot study of the dimensional accuracy of double-arch and complete-arch impressions. J Prosthet Dent 87 (2002) 510-515
20. Cox J.R. A clinical study comparing marginal and occlusal accuracy of crowns fabricated from double-arch and complete-arch impressions. Aust Dent J 50 (2005) 90-94
21. ANSI/ADA Specification 19/ISO 4823:2000. Dental elastomeric impression materials; Approved Apr 2004. Available at: https://siebel.ada.org/ecustomer_enu/
22. Berg J.C., Johnson G.H., Lepe X., and Adán-Plaza S. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting. J Prosthet Dent 90 (2003) 150-161
23. Perakis N., Belser U.C., and Magne P. Final impressions: a review of material properties and description of a current technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent 24 (2004) 109-117
24. Winstanley R.B., Carrotte P.V., and Johnson A. The quality of impressions for crowns and bridges received at commercial dental laboratories. Br Dent J 183 (1997) 209-213
25. Hardin J.W., and Hilbe J.M. Generalized estimating equation (2002), Chapman & Hall/CRC, New York 57-95