We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
EVALUATION STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Evaluation and Comparison of the Effect of Different Border Molding Materials on Complete Denture Retention: An in vivo Study.
Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice 2018 August 2
AIM: Different border molding materials have different qualities which help in recording fine details of tissues. The present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effect of different border molding materials on complete denture retention.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study was conducted on 10 completely edentulous patients in the age group of 50 to 70 years. On each patient, three different border moldings were completed. In group I, border molding was done with green stick impression compound. In group II, border molding was done with putty consistency addition silicone. In group III, border molding and final impression were done by polyether impression material in a single step. Permanent denture bases were fabricated with wire loop at the center. Retention was assessed in all three groups using a digital force gauge.
RESULTS: Upon data compilation and preparation of spread sheets for concerned groups, it was subjected to statistical analysis using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 21.0 for Windows. Mean age ± standard deviation (SD) was 57.40 ± 8.46 in group I, 57.40 ± 8.46 in group II, and 57.40 ± 8.46 in group III. The difference was nonsignificant (p > 0.05). The overall mean value for the group I was 4.59 ± 0.81. For group II, it was 4.7 ± 0.81. For group III, it was 6.72 ± 0.81. The difference was significant (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Green stick compound with light body final wash showed the lowest mean values of complete denture retention. Dentures made using polyether final impression material showed the highest mean values of complete denture retention followed by putty rubber base border molding with light body final wash.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In this study, polyether showed the highest mean retentive value compared with other tested materials; therefore, it could possibly provide some future innovative means in achieving optimal denture retention.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study was conducted on 10 completely edentulous patients in the age group of 50 to 70 years. On each patient, three different border moldings were completed. In group I, border molding was done with green stick impression compound. In group II, border molding was done with putty consistency addition silicone. In group III, border molding and final impression were done by polyether impression material in a single step. Permanent denture bases were fabricated with wire loop at the center. Retention was assessed in all three groups using a digital force gauge.
RESULTS: Upon data compilation and preparation of spread sheets for concerned groups, it was subjected to statistical analysis using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 21.0 for Windows. Mean age ± standard deviation (SD) was 57.40 ± 8.46 in group I, 57.40 ± 8.46 in group II, and 57.40 ± 8.46 in group III. The difference was nonsignificant (p > 0.05). The overall mean value for the group I was 4.59 ± 0.81. For group II, it was 4.7 ± 0.81. For group III, it was 6.72 ± 0.81. The difference was significant (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Green stick compound with light body final wash showed the lowest mean values of complete denture retention. Dentures made using polyether final impression material showed the highest mean values of complete denture retention followed by putty rubber base border molding with light body final wash.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In this study, polyether showed the highest mean retentive value compared with other tested materials; therefore, it could possibly provide some future innovative means in achieving optimal denture retention.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app