ArticleFrontiers in dentistry2020
Comparison of Retention and Seating of Implant-Supported Hard and Soft Metal Copings.
Article in Frontiers in dentistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Implant-supported restorations are generally used for the replacement of the lost teeth. Stability against masticatory forces and proper retention are critical for optimal durability of restorations. The aim of this experimental study was to compare the retention of cobalt-chromium (Co-Cr) copings made by different techniques. Materials and Methods: Twenty-four solid abutment analogs were mounted and scanned with a desktop scanner. They were divided into two groups (n=12) and received metal copings fabricated by either soft or hard Co-Cr alloy. Soft Ceramill Sintron Co-Cr patterns were milled and sintered. Hard Co-Cr blocks were milled in a milling machine. The copings were sandblasted, polished, adjusted, and placed on the respective abutments. The frequency of adjustments was recorded for each abutment. The copings were cemented with zinc phosphate cement and underwent tensile test by a universal testing machine. The Mann-Whitney test and t-test were used to compare the two groups (α=0.05). Results: There was no significant difference in retention of copings between the experimental groups. The mean retentive force was 559.58±115.66 N and 557.13 ±130.48 N for the soft and hard metal groups, respectively (P=0.96). Considering the non-normal distribution of adjustment frequency data, the Mann-Whitney test showed that the frequency of adjustments was significantly higher in the hard metal group than the soft metal group (9.5 versus 0.1667; P<0.001). Conclusion: Although hard metal copings required more adjustments, retention of soft and hard Co-Cr copings was not significantly different.
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.