ArticleJournal of dental sciences2023
Accuracy of digital impressions for implant-supported complete-arch prosthesis when using an auxiliary geometry device.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Working Casts Fabricated by Four Implant Impression Techniques in Parallel and Nonparallel Implant Configurations.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- In Vitro Comparison of the Dimensional Accuracy of Implant Impressions Using Custom Acrylic Trays and Prefabricated Self-Perforating Trays: Protocol for a Comparative Evaluation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Materials and Techniques for Splinting Scan Bodies: A Scoping Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Accuracy of digital impressions captured by an intraoral scanner in a partially edentulous mandible.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Impact of scan body splinting on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Digital Technologies in Implantology: A Narrative Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Accuracy of digital impressions in edentulous arches for implant-supported prostheses: AnBioinformation · 2025Article
- Effect of soft tissue thickness on accuracy of conventional and digital implant impression techniques.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- [Research progress on accuracy of intraoral digital impressions for implant-supported prostheses in edentulous jaw].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2024Review
- Impact of scanning strategies on the accuracy of virtual interocclusal records in partially edentulous arch using intraoral scanner: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Effect of different implant locations and abutment types on stress and strain distribution under non-axial loading: A 3-dimensional finite element analysis.Journal of dental sciences · 2024Article
- [Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2023Article
- Comparative evaluation of open tray impression technique: investigating the precision of four splinting materials in multiple implants.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Influence of the implant scan body modifications on trueness of digital impressions.Journal of dental sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/purpose: Digital impressions using intraoral scanners have recently gained popularity. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the fit of full-arch screw-retained cobalt-chromium frameworks fabricated via two different digital impression methods. Materials and methods: An edentulous resin master model with four dental implants was fabricated. Forty cobalt-chromium superstructures were fabricated and evaluated according to four groups. In Group 1, the superstructures were evaluated using an intraoral scanner to generate digital impressions. Group 2 relied on the help of an auxiliary geometric appliance in generation of digital impressions via intraoral scanner. The traditional method of splinted open-tray conventional impressions was designated for Group 3. Finally, the control group (Group 4) relied on scanning of the master model directly with a laboratory scanner. Vertical marginal discrepancy was evaluated, and data obtained were statistically analyzed. Results: The highest mean vertical marginal gap value (80.86 ± 50.06 μm) was observed for Group 1 and statistically higher than Group 2, 3, and 4 ( Conclusion: It has been suggested that the use of auxiliary geometric appliances yields increased scanning accuracy. Frameworks fabricated using the traditional splinted open-tray technique were more reliable compared to those frameworks from digital impressions.
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.