Pedro Molinero-Mourelle, Lukas Peter, Ana Sol Gaviria, Manrique Fonseca, Martin Schimmel, Joannis Katsoulis
{"title":"Tactile misfit detection ability at the implant-abutment interface of internal connection dental implants: an in-vitro study.","authors":"Pedro Molinero-Mourelle, Lukas Peter, Ana Sol Gaviria, Manrique Fonseca, Martin Schimmel, Joannis Katsoulis","doi":"10.1080/00016357.2023.2223715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this <i>in-vitro</i> study was to investigate the tactile assessment ability at the implant impression-taking stage.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty clinicians (18 novices, 12 experts) were included for a tactile fit assessment by using a used/new probe (tip diameter 100 µm/20 µm). Six implant replicas and related impression copings of two internal connection implant systems were used, each with a perfect fit (0 µm) and defined vertical micro gaps of 8, 24, 55, 110 and 220 µm at the interface. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive methods and non-parametric tests with a focus on specificity (ability to detect perfect fit), sensitivity (ability to detect misfit), and predictive values. P-values <5% were considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tactile assessment showed a mean total sensitivity for the Straumann and Nobel Biocare systems of 83% and 80% with a used probe, and 91% and 92% with a new probe, respectively. The mean total specificities were 33% and 20% with a used probe and 17% and 3% with a new probe, respectively. No statistical significance was observed between novice and expert clinicians concerning their tactile assessment ability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The ability to detect a perfect fit (specificity) with a probe was very poor for both implant systems and impaired with the use of a new probe. The use of a new probe improved the gap detection ability (sensitivity) significantly at the expense of the specificity. A combination of additional chairside techniques with training and calibration could improve clinicians' ability to correctly assess the fit/misfit at the implant-abutment interface.</p>","PeriodicalId":7313,"journal":{"name":"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica","volume":" ","pages":"591-596"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00016357.2023.2223715","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this in-vitro study was to investigate the tactile assessment ability at the implant impression-taking stage.
Methods: Thirty clinicians (18 novices, 12 experts) were included for a tactile fit assessment by using a used/new probe (tip diameter 100 µm/20 µm). Six implant replicas and related impression copings of two internal connection implant systems were used, each with a perfect fit (0 µm) and defined vertical micro gaps of 8, 24, 55, 110 and 220 µm at the interface. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive methods and non-parametric tests with a focus on specificity (ability to detect perfect fit), sensitivity (ability to detect misfit), and predictive values. P-values <5% were considered statistically significant.
Results: The tactile assessment showed a mean total sensitivity for the Straumann and Nobel Biocare systems of 83% and 80% with a used probe, and 91% and 92% with a new probe, respectively. The mean total specificities were 33% and 20% with a used probe and 17% and 3% with a new probe, respectively. No statistical significance was observed between novice and expert clinicians concerning their tactile assessment ability.
Conclusions: The ability to detect a perfect fit (specificity) with a probe was very poor for both implant systems and impaired with the use of a new probe. The use of a new probe improved the gap detection ability (sensitivity) significantly at the expense of the specificity. A combination of additional chairside techniques with training and calibration could improve clinicians' ability to correctly assess the fit/misfit at the implant-abutment interface.