ArticleClinical oral investigations2021
Disposable plastic trays and their effect on polyether and vinyl polysiloxane impression accuracy-an in vitro study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dimensional accuracy of dental impression materials evaluated using a standardized CAD based method across materials tray types and techniques.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dimensional Accuracy of Regular- and Fast-Setting Vinyl Polysiloxane Impressions Using Customized Metal and Plastic Trays-An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Accuracy of polyether and vinylpolysiloxane impressions when using different types of 3D-printed impression trays - an in vitro study.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Article
- Dimensional Accuracy of Novel Vinyl Polysiloxane Compared with Polyether Impression Materials: An In Vitro Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the dimensional accuracy of impressions taken by use of disposable stock plastic trays and to compare performance with that of metal trays. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom a metallic model incorporating three precision balls and three abutment teeth, one-step dual-phase polyether (PE) and vinyl polysiloxane (VPS) impressions were taken using either metal or disposable plastic trays (n = 10 for each of the resulting four test groups). Respective plaster cast scans were aligned with the reference dataset to evaluate global (distance and angle deviations) and local (trueness and precision) accuracy. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to determine group differences.
resultsFor all impression tray and material combinations, global accuracy was good (mean distance changes < 100 μm) with greatest deviations being observed for distances exceeding one quadrant of the dental arch. In general, distances measured in the plaster casts were too short. Only VPS impressions with plastic trays showed a different behavior with a large percentage of cross-arch distances exceeding the reference value. Mean local accuracy ranged between 6 and 14 μm (trueness), and 6 and 16 μm (precision). On abutment tooth level, metal trays were associated with a significantly better precision (p = 0.015).
conclusionsThe observed distortions of the studied impression trays and materials are small and should enable satisfying clinical impression-taking. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Cleaning and processing of metal trays before re-use are time-consuming. Especially for patients' management with single crowns and small fixed dental prostheses, disposable plastic trays can be a viable and cost-effective alternative.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.