ArticleBioMed research international2026
Impact of Scannable Healing Abutment Type on the Accuracy of Implant Impression.
Article in BioMed research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of Scannable Healing Abutment Type on the Accuracy of Implant Impression.BioMed research international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The objectives of this study are to determine whether scannable healing abutment (SHA) geometry affects implant-impression accuracy compared with conventional scan bodies (SBs) and to assess the effect of a detachable cap on SHA accuracy. Methods: Three partially edentulous mandibular models were fabricated, each with two implants at the right second premolar and first molar, corresponding to three implant systems: IS-III active (Neobiotech), TS-III (Osstem), and Bright tissue level (Dentium). For each system, scans were obtained with SBs and SHAs; in the Bright system, a detachable-cap SHA (SHAC-B) was additionally tested. The seven groups were SB-I, SB-T, SB-B, SHA-I, SHA-T, SHA-B, and SHAC-B ( Results: 3D linear deviations were < 70 Conclusions: SHA geometry influenced implant-impression accuracy, yet deviations were generally within clinically acceptable ranges. Cap application reduced accuracy, highlighting the need to optimize cap design and connection.
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.