ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2024
Comparative Evaluation of Ozone Water and Glutaraldehyde on Surface Detail Reproduction of Vinyl Polyether Silicone Impression Materials at Different Time Intervals.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The study aims to evaluate the impact of chemical disinfection using ozone water and glutaraldehyde on the surface detail reproduction (SDR) of vinyl polyether silicone (VPES) impression material at different time intervals. Methodology: VPES impressions were categorized into light-body and heavy-body groups and further divided based on the disinfectant used (ozone water or glutaraldehyde) and the time interval of disinfection (T1: 15 minutes and T2: 24 hours). A total of 80 impressions (40 light-body and 40 heavy-body) were prepared and subjected to the respective disinfection protocols. The SDR was evaluated using a standard scoring system to determine the quality of detail reproduction. Results: Ozone water demonstrated superior performance in preserving surface detail compared to glutaraldehyde at both T1 and T2 for both light-body VPES and heavy-body VPES. Light-body VPES showed better SDR scores compared to heavy-body VPES across all conditions. Specifically, for light-body VPES, the mean SDR scores at T1 were significantly better for ozone water compared to glutaraldehyde (mean scores: 1.00 vs. 1.27, Conclusion: Ozone water is a more effective disinfectant than glutaraldehyde for preserving the surface detail of VPES impressions, especially when disinfection is conducted for a shorter duration (15 minutes).
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.