Evaluation of the effect of different complete denture impression techniques on dental anxiety levels
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32828/mdj.v18i1.917Keywords:
denture, complete, impression technique, perceptionAbstract
Background: There are several different impression materials and techniques utilized in the fabrication of complete dentures.
Aim of the study: To determine the anxiety levels and the clinical procedure time for maxillary completely edentulous patients by the use of two different impression techniques; the use of a low-fusing green stick compound along with zinc oxide eugenol impression paste and addition silicone (polyvinyl siloxane) along with light body material.
Materials and Methods: Twelve maxillary edentulous subjects aged between 44 and 68 were randomly recruited for the study. After having the primary impression two special trays were fabricated for each patient; the first tray for the sectional border moulding group using impression compound along with ZOE final impression material (Group Z), and the second tray for the single-step border moulding technique using additional polyvinyl siloxane impression along with light body final impression materials (Group P). Comparisons between the two groups' procedure time and patients' visual analog scale (VAS) levels were made.
Results: The results showed that group P had significantly reduced the VAS compared to group Z 17.5±12.88 and 57.5±16.03, respectively (P=0.000). The mean total procedure times for single-step border moulding and sectional border moulding impression techniques were 12.25±5.16 and 27.5±4.00, respectively (P=0.000). Also, a significant association between the treatment groups and VAS scores was observed by the multiple regression analysis model (P=0.000).
Conclusion: As a result of the better patients' perceptions and reduced clinical time, the study findings suggested using a single-step border moulding technique in the upper arch together with additional vinyl silicon material.
References
References
Katna, V., et al., To study the flow property of seven commercially available zinc oxide eugenol impression material at various time intervals after mixing. J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 2014. 14(4): p. 393-399.
Kumaran, G.V., K. Robin, and D. Ganapathy, Different impression materials used for complete denture fabrication–a review. PJAEE, 2020. 17(7): p. 1897-1901.
Jayaraman, S., et al., Final‐impression techniques and materials for making complete and removable partial dentures. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., 2018(4).
Tsirogiannis, P., et al., Can we measure patients’ perception during dental impressions? The Burdens in Dental Impression-Making Questionnaire–BiDIM-Q. J Prosthodont Res, 2017. 61(1): p. 34-42.
Chandak, A.H., et al., An in vitro study to evaluate and compare the flow property of different commercially available zinc oxide eugenol impression materials. Contemp Clin Dent, 2018. 9(Suppl 1): p. S137.
Rao, S., R. Chowdhary, and S. Mahoorkar, A systematic review of impression technique for conventional complete denture. J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 2010. 10(2): p. 105-111.
Gallardo, Y.R., et al., Patient outcomes and procedure working time for digital versus conventional impressions: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent, 2018. 119(2): p. 214-219.
George, R.S., N. Muralidharan, and A. Roy, Irritants and Allergens in Dental Materials-A Review. J Pharm Res Int, 2020: p. 132-138.
Petrie, C.S., M.P. Walker, and K. Williams, A survey of US prosthodontists and dental schools on the current materials and methods for final impressions for complete denture prosthodontics. J Prosthodont, 2005. 14(4): p. 253-262.
Wadhwani, C.P., et al., Accuracy of newly formulated fast-setting elastomeric impression materials. J Prosthet Dent, 2005. 93(6): p. 530-539.
Chee, W.W. and T.E. Donovan, Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials: a review of properties and techniques. J Prosthet Dent, 1992. 68(5): p. 728-732.
Perakis, N., U.C. Belser, and P. Magne, Final impressions: a review of material properties and description of a current technique. Int J Periodontics Restorative Dent, 2004. 24(2).
ZARIR, R., et al., Comparative Evaluation of the Border Morphology Produced by Three Different Border Molding Materials: An In-vivo Study. J Clin Diagn Res, 2022. 16(4).
Mittal, S., et al., Single step silicone border molding technique for edentulous impression. Int J Clin Cases Invest, 2012. 4: p. 85-90.
Gupta, R., R. Luthra, and S. Mehta, Comparative analysis of two border molding techniques and materials on maxillary complete denture retention-an in-vivo study. JAMDSR, 2015. 3(4): p. 109.
Jassim, T.K., A.E. Kareem, and M.A. Alloaibi, In vivo evaluation of the impact of various border molding materials and techniques on the retention of complete maxillary dentures. Dent Med Probl., 2020. 57(2): p. 191-196.
Hyde, T., et al., A randomised controlled trial of complete denture impression materials. J Dent, 2014. 42(8): p. 895-901.
Pawar, R.S., R.S. Kulkarni, and P.E. Raipure, A modified technique for single-step border molding. J Prosthet Dent, 2018. 120(5): p. 654-657.
Gjelvold, B., et al., Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthodont, 2016. 25(4): p. 282-287.
Al‐Ahmar, A., et al., Quality of master impressions and related materials for fabrication of complete dentures in the UK 1. J Oral Rehabil, 2008. 35(2): p. 111-115.
Jabeen, F., et al., Survey of current materials and impression techniques for complete dentures among Indian Prosthodontists: An original research. EJMCM. 7(11): p. 2020.
Kakatkar, V.R., Complete denture impression techniques practiced by private dental practitioners: a survey. J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 2013. 13(3): p. 233-235.
Bhochhibhoya, A., et al., Survey of current materials and impression techniques for complete dentures among Nepalese prosthodontists. JCMS-Nepal, 2018. 14(2): p. 75-80.
Mehra, M., F. Vahidi, and R.W. Berg, A complete denture impression technique survey of postdoctoral prosthodontic programs in the United States. J Prosthodont, 2014. 23(4): p. 320-327.
Omar, R., et al., Influence of procedural variations during the laboratory phase of complete denture fabrication on patient satisfaction and denture quality. J Dent, 2013. 41(10): p. 852-860.
Smith, D.E., et al., One-step border molding of complete denture impressions using a polyether impression material. J Prosthet Dent, 1979. 41(3): p. 347-351.
Qanungo, A., et al., Comparative evaluation of border molding using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches: A clinical study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc, 2016. 16(4): p. 340.
Sheth, A., Hazards and Compatibility of Dental Materials. 2022.
de Resende, G.P., T.E. Nogueira, and C.R. Leles, Effectiveness of a simplified method for final impression in complete denture treatment: A pragmatic clinical trial. Gerodontology, 2019. 36(4): p. 365-373.
Woelfel, J.B., J.C. Hickey, and T. Berg, Jr., Contour variations in one patient's impressions made by seven dentists. J Am Dent Assoc, 1963. 67: p. 1-9.
Hyde, T.P., et al., A randomised controlled trial of complete denture impression materials. J Dent, 2014. 42(8): p. 895-901.
Lepe, X., et al., Wettability, imbibition, and mass change of disinfected low-viscosity impression materials. J Prosthet Dent, 2002. 88(3): p. 268-276.
Sivaramakrishnan, G., M. Alsobaiei, and K. Sridharan, Patient preference and operating time for digital versus conventional impressions: A network meta‐analysis. Aust Dent J, 2020. 65(1): p. 58-69.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Mustansiria Dental Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
