• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.287-293
• /
• 2017

PURPOSE. To compare the dimensional accuracy of three impression techniques- a separating foil impression, a custom tray impression, and a stock tray impression. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A machined mandibular complete-arch metal model with special modifications served as a master cast. Three different impression techniques (n = 6 in each group) were performed with addition-cured silicon materials: i) putty-wash technique with a prefabricated metal tray (MET) using putty and regular body, ii) single-phase impression with custom tray (CUS) using regular body material, and iii) two-stage technique with stock metal tray (SEP) using putty with a separating foil and regular body material. All impressions were poured with epoxy resin. Six different distances (four intra-abutment and two inter-abutment distances) were gauged on the metal master model and on the casts with a microscope in combination with calibrated measuring software. The differences of the evaluated distances between the reference and the three test groups were calculated and expressed as mean (${\pm}SD$). Additionally, the 95% confidence intervals were calculated and significant differences between the experimental groups were assumed when confidence intervals did not overlap. RESULTS. Dimensional changes compared to reference values varied between -74.01 and $32.57{\mu}m$ (MET), -78.86 and 30.84 (CUS), and between -92.20 and 30.98 (SEP). For the intra-abutment distances, no significant differences among the experimental groups were detected. CUS showed a significantly higher dimensional accuracy for the inter-abutment distances with -0.02 and -0.08 percentage deviation compared to MET and SEP. CONCLUSION. The separation foil technique is a simple alternative to the custom tray technique for single tooth restorations, while limitations may exist for extended restorations with multiple abutment teeth.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.389-400
• /
• 2007

Statement of problem. Use of the conventional dental impression procedure is problematic in patients who have difficulty opening their mouth, difficulty breathing through their nose or tendency to gag. Purpose. It is necessary to make individual trays more comfortable for patients during impression taking procedure. It was reported at the KAP Annual Meeting 2001 Seoul that an improved impression technique was suitable for this purpose. In this study, the accuracy of the improved dental impression method for implant was compared with the conventional dental impression method. Material and methods. An oral simulator was made from clear acrylic resin block which had similar form of edentulous ridge. For setting up the standard, five fixtures were installed on it. Study casts were made using two kinds of impression techniques. One was the conventional method that was taken using silicone impression material and an individual resin tray under connection of inter-fixture relation. The other was the improved method in which was the connection of the impression coping and the thermoformed polymethyl methacrylate tray. In addition, two different study casts were made from the improved impression body. The coordinates of the fixture on the study model were measured by three-dimensional coordinate measuring equipment. Then the distances between each fixture were calculated and compared with that of oral simulator. Accuracy of the each impression method was also assessed. Results. The differences of inter-fixture dimension between study casts and simulator in the improved impression technique showed $0.014{\pm}0.016mm$ and $0.017{\pm}0.022mm$, respectively and that of the conventional method was $0.017{\pm}0.014mm$. There was no significant difference between the improved impression technique and conventional method. Conclusion. The improved impression technique is useful for multiple support implants.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.57 no.9
• /
• pp.524-528
• /
• 2019

With the advances of CAD-CAM (computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing) technology, the field of modern clinical dentistry has been dramatically changed. The first step in the digital workflow for tooth-supported dental prosthesis is a data acquisition with intraoral digital or conventional impression techniques. For the accuracy of intraoral digital impression data, the basic principles of conventional impression should be applied. It is necessary to obtain a good visibility with properly-dried field and well-exposed margin of the prepared abutment. Currently, the equi- or supra-gingival finish line can be recommended as an indication for intraoral digital impression. The scan data are generally exported to '.stl' file format, which has only morphological information of black and whitem while '.obj' file format can store data on color and texture.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.15 no.5
• /
• pp.323-324
• /
• 1977

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.15 no.6
• /
• pp.389-391
• /
• 1977

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.261-263
• /
• 1977

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.535-543
• /
• 1997

In order to compare the accuracy of impression technique using the addition silicone putty and improved heavy body material, impression were taken for the natural 6 maxillary anterior teeth, and for the metal mast model that has full arch shape with 4 cylindrical abutment teeth. Marginal gingiva was retracted by routine method using retraction cord, and two techniques were tried to compare the length of impression materials in the gingival sulcus. This was aimed to see the effect of viscosity and hydraulic pressure of impression materials for the subgingival impression. Impressions for the full arch-shaped metal master model were taken to compare the linear stability of the different impression materials and their related techniques. The conclusions were as belows : 1. The one-step impression technique showed longer extension of impression material in gingival sulcus than two-step impression technique. 2. High viscosity and hydraulic pressure of impression material were useful to take subgingival impression. 3. There was no statistically significant difference for the two-dimensional accuracy of impression technique, but two-step technique showed better trend than one-step technique.

• Journal of Korean Dental Science
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.152-161
• /
• 2022

Mandibular implant overdenture is a good treatment option for complete edentulous patients with restoring removable prosthesis. Mandibular implant overdenture with two implants and locator attachments is widely used. It is tissue-supported overdenture that is made with the concept of conventional complete denture fabrication. There are two patients who provided impressions by open mouth technique and closed mouth technique in each case. In both cases, mandibular implant overdentures were restored with functionally and aesthetically satisfying results.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.56 no.7
• /
• pp.366-374
• /
• 2018

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated form the conventional and the digital impression technique. Materials and methods : Ten patients were restored with monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression technique. Before definitive insertion, silicone replicas were produced from all twenty crowns. The silicone replicas were cut in three sections; each section was evaluated at two points. The measurement was carried out by using a measuring microscope (Olympus BX 51) and I-Solution. Data from the silicone replica scores were analyzed by Shapiro-Wilk test for normal distribution and the t-test for equality of two population's mean. All tests were performed with ${\alpha}-level$ of 0.05. Results : The average marginal gaps of monolithic zirconia restorations were $133.81{\pm}36.46{\mu}m$ for the conventional impression technique, $90.07{\pm}9.47{\mu}m$ for the digital impression technique. No statistical differences were found between the two impression techniques Conclusion : Both prostheses presented clinically acceptable results with comparing the marginal fit.

• Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.82-90
• /
• 2021

Objectives: Cleft lip and palate (CLP) is one of the most common congenital deformities with worldwide prevalence. It causes a range of issues for infants that mainly involve difficulty in feeding due to abnormal oronasal communication. For this purpose, feeding plates are provided to infants to act as an artificial palate to aid in feeding. The most crucial procedure in fabrication of a feeding plate is creation of the impression using the traditional finger technique or impression trays. This preliminary research aims to compare the effectiveness of novel impression trays with that of the traditional finger technique for recording impressions of infants with CLP. Materials and Methods: This randomized controlled trial was conducted among 30 infants who were divided into two groups based on the method of obtaining impressions: Group I, finger technique; Group II, specialized acrylic tray (cleftray). Results: Use of cleftray required less impression time, a reduced amount of material, no incidence of cyanosis/choking in infants, and lower anxiety among doctors compared to the traditional method. Additionally, there was no distortion of cleft impressions, recorded maxillary tuberosity, or other fine details. Therefore, the novel impression tray (cleftray) exhibited superior outcomes in all the parameters compared to the finger technique. Conclusion: Within the limitations of this study, we conclude that impression trays are superior to the traditional finger, spoon, or ice cream stick methods of creating impressions of CLP. However, it is necessary to conduct more clinical trials on a larger population based on other parameters to compare the effectiveness of the two techniques to draw definitive conclusions.