• Users Online: 1117
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 7  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 5-7

A comparative evaluation of accuracy of three impression techniques in parallel and angulated multiple implant impressions: An in vitro study

1 Private Practitioner, Department of Prosthodontics, Vikrant's Dental and Dentofacial Center, Patna, Bihar, India
2 Private Practitioner, Department of Oral Surgery, Vikrant's Dental and Dentofacial Center, Patna, Bihar, India
3 Private Practitioner, Department of Prosthodontics, Dr Rajneesh' Dental Implant And Esthetic Center, Rohini, Delhi, India
4 Visiting Consultant, Department of Prosthodontics, Gdc, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
5 Assitant Professor, Department of Prosthodontics, Gdc, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India
6 Tutor, Department of Oral Pathology, Dr Anchal's Classes For Pg Preparation, Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Rajneesh Kumar
Dr Rajneesh Dental Clinic and Implant Center, Plot No 238, Ground Floor, Pocket 8, Sector 24, Rohini, New Delhi
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/INPC.INPC_57_19

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Dental implants have become the treatment of choice in many situations where missing teeth require functional and esthetic replacements. The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the accuracy of multiple implant impressions using different impression techniques such as open tray nonsplinted, open tray splinted, and closed tray in both parallel as well as angulated implants. Materials and Methods: Two acrylic models were fabricated with four implant analogs placed in each model. Three impression groups, Group 1 (open-tray nonsplinted technique), Group 2 (open -tray splinted technique), and Group 3 (closed tray technique) were formed for each model. The post hoc Tukey's test was used for multiple comparisons. Results: The results show that Group 3 is least accurate after that, Group 1 and Group 2 are most accurate techniques for impression making. Conclusions: These results indicate that the open-tray (pickup) impression technique is more accurate as compared to the closed tray (reposition) technique in both Model A (parallel analogs) and Model B (angulated analogs).

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded153    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal