We are using cookies to implement functions like login, shopping cart or language selection for this website. Furthermore we use Google Analytics to create anonymized statistical reports of the usage which creates Cookies too. You will find more information in our privacy policy.
OK, I agree I do not want Google Analytics-Cookies
Quintessence International
Login:
username:

password:

Plattform:

Forgotten password?

Registration

Quintessence Int 36 (2005), No. 2     3. Jan. 2005
Quintessence Int 36 (2005), No. 2  (03.01.2005)

Page 97-104


Selected characteristics of a new polyvinyl siloxane impression material - A randomized clinical trial
Blatz, Markus B./Sadan, Avishai/Burgess, John O./Mercante, Donald/Holst, Stefan
Objectives: This study evaluated the ability of a new polyvinyl siloxane impression material (Affinis, Coltène/Whaledent, material A) to obtain final impressions free of bubbles and voids for indirect fixed cuspal-coverage restorations. The results were compared to a control polyvinyl siloxane impression material (material B). Both materials were handled by inexperienced clinicians (undergraduate dental students) in student clinics.
Method and Materials: One-hundred and thirty patients who were treated in the Louisiana State University School of Dentistry Junior Student Clinic for indirect fixed cuspal-coverage restorations and who met the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to either one of two treatment groups, group A (n = 65) or group B (n = 65). Two calibrated examiners evaluated the first impression of prepared posterior teeth at a magnification of 10 for acceptability (no voids or bubbles). Position of tooth, type of preparation, preparation finish line (Class I-V), and gingival bleeding scores were recorded. All statistical tests were performed with the level of significance set at .05.
Results: The Fisher-Freeman-Halton test did not reveal significant associations between material and gingival bleeding score (P = .492). Significant differences in the location of the preparation finish line between materials were observed (P = .0096); material A was more frequently used in cases where the preparation finish line was located at least 2 mm subgingivally. Logistic regression was used to assess the effect of the material on the success of the impression (acceptable/ unacceptable). Material was highly significant in the logistic model (P < .001) with an odds in favor of an acceptable impression being eight times higher with material A than with material B (odds ratio = 8.00; 95% confidence index for odds ration: 2.832, 22.601). The 60/65 (92.3%) impressions made with material A and 39/65 (60%) impressions made with material B were rated "acceptable."
Conclusion: The new polyvinyl siloxane impression material provided a significantly higher proportion of impressions free of bubbles and voids than the control polyvinyl siloxane material.

Keywords: accuracy, final impression, fixed restoration, impression material, randomized clinical trial