Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry?
Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate dental impression accuracy of one-step and two-step techniques compared to a modified two-step technique. Methods: Four impression techniques were compared: (1) a one-step double mix (DM) technique, (2) a cut-out (CO) technique, in which space re...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | Dentistry Journal |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/11/5/139 |
| _version_ | 1797600495177564160 |
|---|---|
| author | Anastasia Zappi Efstratios Papazoglou Maria Anagnostou |
| author_facet | Anastasia Zappi Efstratios Papazoglou Maria Anagnostou |
| author_sort | Anastasia Zappi |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate dental impression accuracy of one-step and two-step techniques compared to a modified two-step technique. Methods: Four impression techniques were compared: (1) a one-step double mix (DM) technique, (2) a cut-out (CO) technique, in which space relief was created using a blade and a laboratory bur, (3) a membrane (ME) technique, in which space relief was created by placing a PVC membrane on top of the putty material during the primary impression, and (4) a wiggling motion (WI) technique, in which PVC membrane was placed and additional wiggling movements were performed during the first 20 s when the primary impression was seated upon the master model (MM). Impressions were poured with type IV stone. Casts were scanned with a laboratory scanner and measurements were made for each cast using three-dimensional analysis software. Results: All groups presented differences compared to MM group, in at least one intra-abutment distance. Groups DM and ME presented the most significant differences, in three and two distances, respectively, whereas CO and WI presented one significant different distance compared to MM. There were no differences between MM and the four techniques for inter-abutment distances. Conclusions: WI yielded similar results with CO technique. Both performed better than the other groups. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T03:48:53Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9f4de74a2e7d450c871a0a291625986d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2304-6767 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T03:48:53Z |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Dentistry Journal |
| spelling | doaj.art-9f4de74a2e7d450c871a0a291625986d2023-11-18T01:03:06ZengMDPI AGDentistry Journal2304-67672023-05-0111513910.3390/dj11050139Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry?Anastasia Zappi0Efstratios Papazoglou1Maria Anagnostou2Department of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, GreeceDepartment of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, GreeceDepartment of Operative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, 11527 Athens, GreeceBackground: The purpose of this study was to evaluate dental impression accuracy of one-step and two-step techniques compared to a modified two-step technique. Methods: Four impression techniques were compared: (1) a one-step double mix (DM) technique, (2) a cut-out (CO) technique, in which space relief was created using a blade and a laboratory bur, (3) a membrane (ME) technique, in which space relief was created by placing a PVC membrane on top of the putty material during the primary impression, and (4) a wiggling motion (WI) technique, in which PVC membrane was placed and additional wiggling movements were performed during the first 20 s when the primary impression was seated upon the master model (MM). Impressions were poured with type IV stone. Casts were scanned with a laboratory scanner and measurements were made for each cast using three-dimensional analysis software. Results: All groups presented differences compared to MM group, in at least one intra-abutment distance. Groups DM and ME presented the most significant differences, in three and two distances, respectively, whereas CO and WI presented one significant different distance compared to MM. There were no differences between MM and the four techniques for inter-abutment distances. Conclusions: WI yielded similar results with CO technique. Both performed better than the other groups.https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/11/5/139dental impression techniquepolyvinylsiloxanewiggling motion techniquedouble mix two-step technique |
| spellingShingle | Anastasia Zappi Efstratios Papazoglou Maria Anagnostou Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? Dentistry Journal dental impression technique polyvinylsiloxane wiggling motion technique double mix two-step technique |
| title | Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? |
| title_full | Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? |
| title_fullStr | Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? |
| title_short | Is a Wiggling-Motion Modified Two-Step Impression Technique as Accurate as Conventional Techniques in Restorative Dentistry? |
| title_sort | is a wiggling motion modified two step impression technique as accurate as conventional techniques in restorative dentistry |
| topic | dental impression technique polyvinylsiloxane wiggling motion technique double mix two-step technique |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6767/11/5/139 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT anastasiazappi isawigglingmotionmodifiedtwostepimpressiontechniqueasaccurateasconventionaltechniquesinrestorativedentistry AT efstratiospapazoglou isawigglingmotionmodifiedtwostepimpressiontechniqueasaccurateasconventionaltechniquesinrestorativedentistry AT mariaanagnostou isawigglingmotionmodifiedtwostepimpressiontechniqueasaccurateasconventionaltechniquesinrestorativedentistry |