Evaluation of a rubber-base impression material

Gunther, Genadi; Welsh, Stephen L.

doi:10.1016/s0022-3913(78)80054-7

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The effect of technique on accuracy has been reported by Gunther and Welsh (1978), Eames and Sieweke (1980), Lehmann and Lindemann (1980), Millstein and Clark (1981), Tjan et al (1984), Bomberg and Hatch (1984), Valderhaug and Fleystrand (1984), Appelbaum and Mehra (1984), de Araujo and Jorgensen (1985), and Johnson and Craig (1986b). The consensus was that for polysulfide the use of a custom tray or a double-mix technique produced more accurate impressions than did a single mix in a stock tray.…”

Section: Effects Of Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 85%

Review of Dental Impression Materials

Craig

1988

Adv Dent Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

M ajor advances in impression materials and their application have occurred during the last decade, with greater emphasis being placed on rubber impression materials than on dental compound, zinc oxide-eugenol, and agar and alginate. Of particular interest has been the effect of disinfection solutions on the qualities of impressions and the biocompatibility of impression materials. The principal advance in hydrocolloids has been the introduction of the agar/alginate impression technique, which has simplified the procedure and improved the quality of gypsum dies compared with those prepared in alginate impressions. The tear strength of some alginates has been improved, and some have been formulated so that the powder is dustless, thus reducing the health hazard as a result of patient inhalation of dust during the dispensing process. Polyether and silicone impression materials have been modified so that the working time, viscosity, and flexibility of the polyethers have been improved and, with the introduction of addition silicones, their accuracy has become exceptional. Although the early addition silicones liberated hydrogen after setting, thus delaying the pouring of models and dies, most addition silicones have been improved so that no hydrogen is released and dies can be poured immediately. The introduction of automatic mixing systems for addition silicones has simplified their manipulation, has reduced the number of voids in impressions, and has reduced the amount of material wasted. The incorporation of surfactants into addition silicones has made them hydrophilic, with wetting properties similar to those of polyethers, and has made pouring bubble-free gypsum dies easier. This review is confined to published and unpublished information of the past decade. It will also suggest trends that should be anticipated in the near future based on this information. The review will not present information developed before 1975, which is available in several textbooks on dental materials by Craig (1985a), Phillips (1982), and Williams and Cunningham (1979). RIGID IMPRESSION MATERIALS IMPRESSION COMPOUND The use of dental tray compound has decreased with the increased substitution of acrylic tray materials. The application of dental impression compound has also decreased with the increased use of rubber impression materials, which can also be electroformed to produce metal dies. However, impression compound is useful for checking cavity preparations for undercuts and for making impressions of full crown preparations where gingival tissues must be displaced. Excessive temperature rise of the pulp chamber is undesirable, and Grajower et al. (1975) recently measured temperature increases in the pulp when

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 85%

Review of Dental Impression Materials

Craig

1988

Adv Dent Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dimensional stability of impression materials decreases as the volume of the material increases (Podshadley & others, 1970;Gunther, 1978;Mitchel & Damele, 1970;Schnell & Phillips, 1958 ted to shrink from the surface irregularly, but will shrink perpendicularly to it (Fig 4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Full Issue PDF

1981

Operative Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SPRING 1981• VOLUME 6 Ai m and ScopeOperative Dentistry p u bl is h es a rticles t hat adva nee th e practice of opera tive de nti stry. The scope of t he journal incl udes co nse rvation and restoration of t eet h; th e sci en tifi c foundation of operative denta l t herapy; dental ma t erials; dental educa ti on ; and th e soci al , po l itical, and econo m ic aspec t s of d ent a l practice . Review papers and letters also are published. Pub lisherOperative Dentistry is publis hed five t imes a year : Winter, Spring -2, S u mmer , and Autumn, by:Operative Su bscriptionsYea r ly s u bscrip ti on i n US A an d Can ada , $20 .00; other coun t ries , $3 0.0 0 (sent air ma i l); dental studen t s, $1 3. 0 0 i n US A and Canada; other coun t ries, $20 .00; sin g le copy in USA and Ca nada , $7 .0 0; ot her countries, $10.00. Make rem itta nce s pa ya ble (i n US dollars only) to Opera tive Dentistry and send t o the above address . ContributionsContributors should st udy t he instruct ions for their guidance printed inside the back co ver and should follow t he m caref ull y. PermissionFor permiss ion to reproduce materi al fr o mOperative Dentistry please apply to Operati ve Dentist ry, Inc at th e above address.Second class postage paid at Seattl e, W A a nd additiona l off ice .• NUMBER 2• 41-80Edi torial Office

show abstract

An Evaluation of Dimensional Accuracy of One-Step and Two-Step Impression Technique Using Addition Silicone Impression Material: An In Vitro Study

Pande

Parkhedkar²

2012

J Indian Prosthodont Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study is aimed to evaluate the dimensional accuracy, the effect of undercut of two different configurations and the elastic recovery of addition silicone impression material assessed indirectly, by measuring the dimensions on stone models recorded from the impression of the master model, using one-step and two-step impression technique, for addition silicone impression materials. Measurements are taken to evaluate horizontal or linear and vertical dimensional changes, of the abutment V and abutment C from the stainless steel model. Heavy body/light body material is used for making one-step impression technique in a custom tray. Putty/light body is used for taking two-step technique in a stock metal tray. Improved die stone is used for pouring the impression. The different 11 locations on the dies produced by two different techniques are measured microscopically on image analyzer and compared with those of stainless steel model. Anova test was applied to test the differences of mean values of inter and intra abutment measurements, to calculate p value. Unpaired t test was applied to calculate t value. Results showed less deviation of stone models produced by one-step technique from stainless steel model, whereas the deviation of stone models produced by two-step is comparatively more. (p < 0.01). This difference of deviation is significantly less in one-step as compared to two-step technique. One-step is sufficiently dimensionally accurate than two-step technique in conjunction with addition silicone impression material. They have the best elastic recovery from the two undercut configurations.

show abstract

Evaluation of a rubber-base impression material

Cited by 8 publications

References 20 publications

Review of Dental Impression Materials

Review of Dental Impression Materials

Full Issue PDF

An Evaluation of Dimensional Accuracy of One-Step and Two-Step Impression Technique Using Addition Silicone Impression Material: An In Vitro Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About