Factors that influence the quality of final impressions for fixed dental prostheses in Nairobi, Kenya
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Good quality dental impressions free of air bubbles, voids, steps, drags, streaks and tears are a pre-requisite for the fabrication of well-fitting fixed dental prostheses (FDP). The quality of impressions is dependent on clinician and material factors.
Aim: To evaluate factors that influence the quality of final impressions for FDP in Nairobi, Kenya.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 234 impressions received by five dental laboratories were analyzed. The study collected information on the type of tray, impression material, technique, type of prostheses, and clinically detectable errors, including voids, inadequate material at margins, tears, steps, drags, and streaks. Impression quality was the outcome assessed as good, fair, or poor by two investigators. The independent variables influencing impression quality included clinician specialty, experience, impression material, technique, and tray type.
Results: Inter-rater agreement was 96.8% (p<0.001). Clinician experience ranged between 1-45yrs, median 13.5yrs and mean 8.39±11.96yrs. The majority were GPs, 80.8% while restorative dentists were 11.5% and other specialists, 7.7%. Most impressions were non-aqueous elastomers, 97.9% employing dual-viscosity technique, 75.6%. Impression trays included stock metal, 60.3%, stock plastic, 34.2%, and custom, 5.5%. Impression quality was good, 24.8%, fair, 37.2% or poor, 38.0%. Cumulatively, 74.5% impressions had bubbles/voids, 53.0% tears and 43.2% poor margins. Clarity of margins was associated with clinician specialty, (Fisher’s exact=9.372, p=0.047), and impression technique with impression quality, (Pearson’s ?2 = 6.385, p=0.041). Compared to restorative specialists, estimated odds of other specialists producing poor margins was 5.71, 95%CI 1.55,21.06, Wald ?2=5.24, p=0.009 while for GPs, the estimated odds was 2.19, 95%CI 0.88, 5.43, Wald ?2 = 2.86, p=0.09. Compared to dual viscosity, estimated odds of monophase giving a poor-quality impression was 1.52, 95%CI 0.83,2.78, Wald ?2 = 1.52, p=0.18.
Conclusion: Most impressions were good or fair hence acceptable. Quality of impressions was influenced by clinician specialty and impression technique.
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Jeyapalan V, Krishnan CS. Partial edentulism and its correlation to age, gender, socio-economic status and incidence of various Kennedy’s classes–a literature review. J Clin Diagnos Res. 2015; 9(6):ZE14-7. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2015/13776.6124
Vadavadagi SV, Srinivasa H, Goutham G, Hajira N, Lahari M, Reddy GP. Partial edentulism and its association with socio-demographic variables among subjects attending dental teaching institutions, India. J Int Oral Health 2015; 7(Suppl 2):60-3.
Charyeva OO, Altynbekov KD, Nysanova BZ. Kennedy classification and treatment options: a study of partially edentulous patients being treated in a specialized prosthetic clinic. J Prosthodont. 2012; 21(3):177-80. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00809.x
Samet N, Shohat M, Livny A, Weiss EI. A clinical evaluation of fixed partial denture impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94(2):112-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2005.05.002
Chaudhari J, Prajapati P, Patel J, Sethuraman R, Naveen Y. Comparative evaluation of the amount of gingival displacement produced by three different gingival retraction systems: An in vivo study. Contemp Clin Dent. 2015;6(2):189-95. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.156043
Rau CT, Olafsson VG, Delgado AJ, Ritter AV, Donovan TE. The quality of fixed prosthodontic impressions: an assessment of crown and bridge impressions received at commercial laboratories. J Am Dent Assoc. 2017;148(9):654-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adaj.2017.04.038
Haghi HR, Shiehzadeh M, Nakhaei M, Ahrary F, Sabzevari S. Effect of technique and impression material on the vertical misfit of a screw-retained, three-unit implant bridge: An in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2017;17(1):41-7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.197937
Al-Odinee NM, Al-Hamzi M, Al-shami IZ, Madfa A, Al-Kholani AI, Al-Olofi YM. Evaluation of the quality of fixed prosthesis impressions in private laboratories in a sample from Yemen. BMC Oral Health. 2020;20(1):304. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-01294-1
Zu Saifudin ASA, Kamaruddin F, Ab Ghani SM. The quality of working impressions for the fabrication of fixed prosthodontics prostheses (crown and bridgework). Eur J Gen Dent. 2014; 3(2):100-4. https://doi.org/10.4103/2278-9626.134831
Erbe C, Ruf S, Wöstmann B, Balkenhol M. Dimensional stability of contemporary irreversible hydrocolloids: humidor versus wet tissue storage. J Prosthet Dent. 2012; 108(2):114-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60117-6
Kisumbi B, Simila H, Osiro O, Omondi B. Selection of impression materials and techniques employed by dentists in Kenya. East Afr Med J. 2017; 94(12): 1040-51.
Edalia L, Kassim B, Otieno F, Dienya T, Mutave R. Success rate of crowns and fixed partial dentures provided to patients at the School of Dental Sciences, University of Nairobi. East Afr Med J. 2017;94(11):901-12.
Imbery TA, Diaz N, Greenfield K, Janus C, Best AM. Quality of impressions and work authorizations submitted by dental students supervised by prosthodontists and general dentists. J Dent Educ. 2016;80(10):1229-36. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.0022-0337.2016.80.10.tb06206.x
Wassell R, Barker D, Walls A. Crowns and other extra-coronal restorations: impression materials and technique. Br Dent J. 2002; 192(12):679-90. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801456
Mitchell ST, Ramp MH, Ramp LC, Liu PR. A preliminary survey of impression trays used in the fabrication of fixed indirect restorations. J Prosthodont. 2009; 18(7):582-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2009.00493.x
Al Mortadi N, Al-Khatib A, Alzoubi KH, Khabour OF. Disinfection of dental impressions: knowledge and practice among dental technicians. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2019; 11:103-8. https://doi.org/10.2147/CCIDE.S205144
Millar B. How to make a good impression (crown and bridge). Br Dent J. 2001; 191(7):402-5. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4801192
Takahashi H, Finger WJ. Effects of the setting stage on the accuracy of double-mix impressions made with addition-curing silicone. J Prosthet Dent. 1994;72(1):78-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(94)90215-1
Franco EB, da Cunha LF, Herrera FS, Benetti AR. Accuracy of single-step versus 2-step double-mix impression technique. Int Sch Res Notices. 2011;2011. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/341546
Caputi S, Varvara G. Dimensional accuracy of resultant casts made by a monophase, one-step and two-step, and a novel two-step putty/light-body impression technique: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008; 99(4):274-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(08)60061-X
Kumar A, Thakur R, Sharma P. Anatomization of Impression Techniques in Fixed Prosthodontics-A Review. J Adv Med Dent Sci Res. 2021;9(3):139-47. https://doi.org/10.21276/jamdsr
Millar BJ, Dunne SM, Robinson PB. In vitro study of the number of surface defects in monophase and two-phase addition silicone impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 1998;80(1):32-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(98)70088-5
Alhouri N, McCord J, Smith P. The quality of dental casts used in crown and bridgework. Br Dent J. 2004;197(5):261-4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.4811621
Punj A, Bompolaki D, Garaicoa J. Dental impression materials and techniques. Dent Clin N Am. 2017;61(4):779-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2017.06.004
Naveen Y, Patil R. Effect of the impression margin thickness on the linear accuracy of impression and stone dies: an in vitro study. J Indian Prosthodont Soc. 2013; 13(1):13-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13191-012-0160-7
Thippanna R, Meshramkai R, Sajjan S. A comparative study to evaluate different impression technique in relation to accuracy of the oclusal plane in fixed partial denture. Indian J Oral Sci. 2015; 6(1): 22-5. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-6944.154605
Ghahremanloo A, Seifi M, Ghanbarzade J, Abrisham SM, Javan RA. Effect of polyvinyl siloxane viscosity on accuracy of dental implant impressions. J Dent (Tehran). 2017; 14(1):40-7