Pressure analysis during impression-making procedure with various tray designs using a digital occlusion analyzer: An in vitro study.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Minji Sun, Jaeyoung Kim, Seojune Choi, Hong Seok Moon
{"title":"Pressure analysis during impression-making procedure with various tray designs using a digital occlusion analyzer: An in vitro study.","authors":"Minji Sun, Jaeyoung Kim, Seojune Choi, Hong Seok Moon","doi":"10.1111/jopr.14087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pressures generated under various relief conditions during impression-making using the digital occlusal analyzer.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A customized device and impression trays were designed to measure pressure during impression-making. The left half of the tray consistently had a 0.5 mm relief without vent holes as the control group, while the right half featured varying relief and vent hole designs, resulting in six different trays. Two impression materials (Materials A and B) were loaded onto each tray, and relative pressure was measured using the digital occlusal analyzer (T-Scan Novus, Tekscan, Inc.). The pressure-reduction ratio of each experimental side was calculated. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the effect of relief conditions and impression materials on the pressure-reduction ratio, followed by post hoc multiple comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The pressure-reduction ratio was significantly influenced by both impression material and relief amount (p < 0.001), with a significant interaction between the two factors (p < 0.001). In Material A, pressure reduction was significantly greater at 3 mm compared to 1 and 2 mm, whereas in Material B, pressure reduction increased progressively with greater relief amount. Regarding vent hole design, both impression material and vent hole configuration significantly affected pressure reduction (p < 0.001), with no significant interaction (p = 0.767). Designs with smaller but more widely spread vent holes demonstrated significantly greater pressure reductions, with significant differences observed only between the single-hole design and the two- or five-hole designs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Pressure reduction during impression making was influenced by both the viscosity of the material and the pressure-relief tray design. Forming vent holes yielded more consistent and effective results than adjusting the tray relief amount, highlighting the importance of a comprehensive approach that integrates both impression material selection and the application of various pressure-relief tray designs.</p>","PeriodicalId":49152,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jopr.14087","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the pressures generated under various relief conditions during impression-making using the digital occlusal analyzer.

Materials and methods: A customized device and impression trays were designed to measure pressure during impression-making. The left half of the tray consistently had a 0.5 mm relief without vent holes as the control group, while the right half featured varying relief and vent hole designs, resulting in six different trays. Two impression materials (Materials A and B) were loaded onto each tray, and relative pressure was measured using the digital occlusal analyzer (T-Scan Novus, Tekscan, Inc.). The pressure-reduction ratio of each experimental side was calculated. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to evaluate the effect of relief conditions and impression materials on the pressure-reduction ratio, followed by post hoc multiple comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment (α = 0.05).

Results: The pressure-reduction ratio was significantly influenced by both impression material and relief amount (p < 0.001), with a significant interaction between the two factors (p < 0.001). In Material A, pressure reduction was significantly greater at 3 mm compared to 1 and 2 mm, whereas in Material B, pressure reduction increased progressively with greater relief amount. Regarding vent hole design, both impression material and vent hole configuration significantly affected pressure reduction (p < 0.001), with no significant interaction (p = 0.767). Designs with smaller but more widely spread vent holes demonstrated significantly greater pressure reductions, with significant differences observed only between the single-hole design and the two- or five-hole designs.

Conclusions: Pressure reduction during impression making was influenced by both the viscosity of the material and the pressure-relief tray design. Forming vent holes yielded more consistent and effective results than adjusting the tray relief amount, highlighting the importance of a comprehensive approach that integrates both impression material selection and the application of various pressure-relief tray designs.

使用数字闭塞分析仪的不同托盘设计在印模过程中的压力分析:一项体外研究。
目的:本研究的目的是利用数字咬合分析仪评估在不同的压痕条件下产生的压力。材料和方法:设计了一种定制的装置和压痕盘,用于测量压痕制作过程中的压力。作为对照组,托盘的左半部分一直有0.5毫米的浮雕,没有排气孔,而右半部分则有不同的浮雕和排气孔设计,导致六个不同的托盘。将两种压模材料(材料A和材料B)加载到每个托盘上,使用数字咬合分析仪(T-Scan Novus, Tekscan, Inc.)测量相对压力。计算了各实验侧的减压比。采用双向方差分析(ANOVA)评价浮雕条件和印模材料对减压比的影响,并采用Bonferroni调整进行事后多重比较(α = 0.05)。结果:压痕材料和卸压量对压痕比均有显著影响(p < 0.001),且两者之间存在显著的交互作用(p < 0.001)。在材料A中,与1和2 mm相比,在3 mm处压力降低明显更大,而在材料B中,压力降低随着缓解量的增加而逐渐增加。在排气孔设计方面,压模材料和排气孔配置对压力降低均有显著影响(p < 0.001),无显著交互作用(p = 0.767)。采用更小但分布更广的排气孔的设计可以显著降低压力,只有单孔设计与两孔或五孔设计之间存在显著差异。结论:压印过程中的压降受材料粘度和减压盘设计的影响。形成排气孔比调整托盘卸压量产生更一致和有效的结果,突出了综合方法的重要性,该方法将压模材料的选择和各种卸压托盘设计的应用结合起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
15.00%
发文量
171
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Prosthodontics promotes the advanced study and practice of prosthodontics, implant, esthetic, and reconstructive dentistry. It is the official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists, the American Dental Association-recognized voice of the Specialty of Prosthodontics. The journal publishes evidence-based original scientific articles presenting information that is relevant and useful to prosthodontists. Additionally, it publishes reports of innovative techniques, new instructional methodologies, and instructive clinical reports with an interdisciplinary flair. The journal is particularly focused on promoting the study and use of cutting-edge technology and positioning prosthodontists as the early-adopters of new technology in the dental community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信