A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Performance of fast-setting impression materials in the reproduction of subgingival tooth surfaces without soft tissue retraction. | LitMetric

Purpose: Fast-setting impression materials may be prone to inaccuracies due to accidental divergence from the recommended mixing protocol. This prospective randomized clinical trial aimed to assess three-dimensional (3D) deviations in the reproduction of subgingival tooth surfaces and to determine the effect of either following or purposely diverging from the recommended mixing procedure for a fast-setting addition-curing silicone (AS) and fast-setting polyether (PE).

Materials And Methods: After three impressions each were taken from 96 participants, sawcut gypsum casts were fabricated with a standardized procedure and then optically digitized. Data were assessed with a computer-aided 3D analysis.

Results: For AS impressions, multivariate analysis of variance revealed a significant influence of the individual tooth and the degree to which the recommended mixing protocol was violated. For PE impressions, the ambient air temperature and individual tooth showed significant effects, while divergence from the recommended mixing protocol was not of significance.

Conclusions: The fast-setting PE material was not affected by changes in the recommended mixing protocol. For the two fast-setting materials examined, no divergences from the recommended mixing protocol of less than 2 minutes led to failures in the reproduction of the subgingival tooth surfaces.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.11607/ijp.3752DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

recommended mixing
24
mixing protocol
20
reproduction subgingival
12
subgingival tooth
12
tooth surfaces
12
fast-setting impression
8
impression materials
8
divergence recommended
8
individual tooth
8
recommended
6

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!