ArticleBMC oral health2025
Variations in linear dimensional accuracy and stability of vinylpolysiloxane-based bite registration materials as a function of different polymerization times.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA wide range of commercially available vinylpolysiloxane-based (VPS) bite registration record (BRR) materials having polymerization time (PT) in a range of 30 to 180 s are available for clinical choice, with less evidence of their stability. This in vitro study was aimed at assessing the linear dimensional accuracy/stability of seven VPS-based BRR materials with different polymerization times (30 to 180 s).
methodsFour hundred and twenty cylindrical samples (30 mm by 3 mm) [control (60); experimental (360)] were planned from seven [Occlufast Rock (O) (PT 60 s), Defend Superfast (D) (PT 30 s), Jet Bluebite (J) (PT 40 s), Virtual Cadbite (V) (PT 45 s), Clear Maxill Bite (C) (PT 75 s), Primo Regular (P) (PT 90 s), and Mark 3 Regular (M) (PT 180 s)] different types of VPS-based BRR materials and were evaluated for dimensional stability at four time intervals [1 h (accuracy), 24, 72, and 168 h (stability)]. Distances between three horizontal coordinates (p1-p2, p3-p4, p5-p6), producing 3 measurements on each sample, were averaged for each subgroup. A one-way ANOVA rank test followed by Dunn’s post-hoc test allowed comparison of median values between/within groups. Statistical significance was kept at a probability value of less than 0.05 (p ≤ 0.05).
resultsOcclufast rock (PT 60s) showed clinical accuracy (≤ 0.11 mm) only at 1 h, indicating poor dimensional stability from 24 to 168 h. Materials with PT ≤ 60 s proved more accurate and stable, except for JetBlueBite [PT 40 s], compared to those with PT > 60. Highest accuracy at 1, 24, and 72 h was observed in Defend Superfast [PT 30s], while Primo Regular [PT 90 s] was more accurate at 168 h. All materials showed significant differences between them at different time intervals. Except for Mark 3, all materials show significant differences in median linear dimensions between 1 and 168 h. Dimensional changes observed were in the form of expansion and contraction.
conclusionsSuperfast setting, scannable, and clear VPS-BRR materials with less PT than regular showed higher accuracy and stability till 7 days. Since clinical materials with lesser PT are desired, they are a good choice for making BRRs. Clinically, different treatment options and treatment procedures will require specific BRR material depending upon the requirement of particular treatment or procedure.
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.