SynthesisBMC oral health2024
Evaluation of the methods for determining accuracy of fit and precision of RPD framework in Digital (3D printed, milled) and conventional RPDs - a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Evaluating micro-CT as a tool for advanced research in prosthetic dentistry: systematic review and meta-analysis.Odontology · 2026Article
- 3D printing vs. conventional wax patterns: a comparative in vitro study on retention of RPD framework.Odontology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the feasibility of intraoral scanning technology for removable partial dentures: ai-assisted measurement analysis and clinical investigation.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Article
- Validating cephalometric angular reconstruction for determining vertical dimension in edentulous patients.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effects of surface treatments on the adhesion strengths between polyether ether ketone and both composite resins and poly(methyl methacrylate).BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Retention of 3-D-Printed, Milled, and Conventionally Fabricated Occlusal Splints.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Chairside digital workflow to obtain an optimized 3D model of a partially edentulous mandible.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe advent of digital technologies has introduced novel methods for RPD fabrication, potentially enhancing the fit compared to the conventional approaches. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the methods to assess the accuracy of fit and precision of the RPD framework fabricated using conventional and digital (3D printed and milled) methods.
methodsA comprehensive literature search (Registration Number CRD42023459566) was conducted across different electronic databases like PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Studies investigating RPD fit and precision assessment using various techniques (Visual inspection and pressing test using silicone impression material, 3D digital analyses using a software, light microscopy, digital microscope at 50x, superimposition method /surface matching software program, µCT on silicone specimens and direct measurements) in in-vitro studies were included. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed to evaluate the methodological rigour of the selected studies. A narrative synthesis of the findings was carried out to evaluate the methods to assess the accuracy of fit and precision of the RPD framework fabricated through conventional and digital methods due to heterogeneity in study variables.
resultsOut of 413 records, a total of 8 in-vitro studies were included in this review. The key findings of the review suggest that RPD fit accuracy varies across fabrication processes including conventional techniques, resin milling, selective laser melting (SLM), and digital superimposition. Resin milling with polyether ether ketone (PEEK) offers the best accuracy. Among the different methods used in assessing the fit accuracy of the RPD framework silicone-based fit evaluation and superimposition techniques/ surface matching are commonly used methods.
conclusionBoth traditional (non-computerized) and computerized methods for the assessment of fit and precision of conventional and digital RPD frameworks are used commonly. But still, formulation of a standard method for fit assessment of RPDs is warranted. In future with further refinements, digital methods would completely outperform the traditional methods.
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.