ArticleClinical oral investigations2024
A comparative study on tensile strength of various thermoplastic polymers sheets following thermoforming on a pre-treatment and post-treatment maxillary model of a patient: an in vitro study.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThermoplastic polymers show alteration in their mechanical properties after thermoforming on a dental model. The purpose of this in-vitro study was to evaluate the tensile strength of different thermoplastic polymer sheets thermoformed on a pre-treatment (moderate crowding) and post-treatment (well-aligned) maxillary model of a patient. MATERIALS AND
methodsForty maxillary models (Twenty Pre-treatment & twenty Post-treatment of uniform dimension) were made by duplicating them using alginate Hydrogum 5 (Zhermack). Samples were then divided into eight groups of 5 samples each. The thermoplastic sheets Imprelon® (Scheu-Dent), AVAC R® (Jaypee), Placa Crystal® (BioART), EZ-VAC® (3A Medes)-1.0 mm thick were thermoformed on these models respectively. The sample was retrieved using ceramic bur mounted on a straight hand-piece and subjected for testing using TINIUS Olsen 10ST micro universal testing machine and recorded.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference (P > .05) in tensile strength of thermoformed thermoplastic polymer sheets between pre-treatment and post-treatment maxillary model. Tensile strength of EZ-VAC (3A Medes) showed higher variation between pre-treatment and post-treatment maxillary model though it was found to be statistically insignificant (P > .05). Significant difference (P < .05) was seen between groups when they were compared separately among pre-treatment and post-treatment models.
conclusionPlaca Crystal (BioART) among the pre-treatment group, EZ - VAC (3A Medes) among the post-treatment group, showed highest tensile strength. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of the study highlights the necessity to test materials in conditions which stands in accordance with the clinical scenario to a considerable extent and also emphasizes the need for further study in aligner.
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.