Links to Exploration step
Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Comparative evaluation of border molding, using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches - An in vivo study</title><author><name sortKey="Yarapatineni, Rameshbabu" sort="Yarapatineni, Rameshbabu" uniqKey="Yarapatineni R" first="Rameshbabu" last="Yarapatineni">Rameshbabu Yarapatineni</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vilekar, Abhishek" sort="Vilekar, Abhishek" uniqKey="Vilekar A" first="Abhishek" last="Vilekar">Abhishek Vilekar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, J Phani" sort="Kumar, J Phani" uniqKey="Kumar J" first="J Phani" last="Kumar">J Phani Kumar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, G Ajay" sort="Kumar, G Ajay" uniqKey="Kumar G" first="G Ajay" last="Kumar">G Ajay Kumar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Aravind, Prasad" sort="Aravind, Prasad" uniqKey="Aravind P" first="Prasad" last="Aravind">Prasad Aravind</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, P Anil" sort="Kumar, P Anil" uniqKey="Kumar P" first="P Anil" last="Kumar">P Anil Kumar</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PMC</idno><idno type="pmid">24453450</idno><idno type="pmc">3895723</idno><idno type="url">http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3895723</idno><idno type="RBID">PMC:3895723</idno><date when="2013">2013</date><idno type="wicri:Area/Pmc/Corpus">002437</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Pmc" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PMC">002437</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a" type="main">Comparative evaluation of border molding, using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches - An in vivo study</title><author><name sortKey="Yarapatineni, Rameshbabu" sort="Yarapatineni, Rameshbabu" uniqKey="Yarapatineni R" first="Rameshbabu" last="Yarapatineni">Rameshbabu Yarapatineni</name></author><author><name sortKey="Vilekar, Abhishek" sort="Vilekar, Abhishek" uniqKey="Vilekar A" first="Abhishek" last="Vilekar">Abhishek Vilekar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, J Phani" sort="Kumar, J Phani" uniqKey="Kumar J" first="J Phani" last="Kumar">J Phani Kumar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, G Ajay" sort="Kumar, G Ajay" uniqKey="Kumar G" first="G Ajay" last="Kumar">G Ajay Kumar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Aravind, Prasad" sort="Aravind, Prasad" uniqKey="Aravind P" first="Prasad" last="Aravind">Prasad Aravind</name></author><author><name sortKey="Kumar, P Anil" sort="Kumar, P Anil" uniqKey="Kumar P" first="P Anil" last="Kumar">P Anil Kumar</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH</title><idno type="ISSN">0976-7428</idno><idno type="eISSN">0976-1799</idno><imprint><date when="2013">2013</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en"><p><bold>Background:</bold>This study was undertaken to compare the retention between sectional border molding using low fusing greenstick compound and single step border molding using condensation silicone (putty) impression material in three stages- A. Immediately following border molding, B. After final impression and C. With the finished permanent denture base.
<bold>Materials & Methods:</bold>In this study evaluation of retentive values of sectional border molding (Group I) (custom impression trays border molded with green stick compound ) and single step border molding (Group II) ( border molding with condensation silicone (putty) impression material ). In both techniques definitive wash impression were made with light body condensation silicone and permanent denture base with heat cure polymerization resin.
<bold>Results:</bold>Group II was significantly higher (mean=8011.43) than Group I (mean=5777.43) in test-A. The t-value (1.5883) infers that there was significant difference between Group I and Group II (p =0.15). Group I was significantly higher (mean=6718.57) than Group II (mean=5224.29) in test -B. The t-value (1.6909) infers that there was significant difference between Group I and Group II (p=0.17). Group II was higher (mean=4025.14) than Group I (mean=3835.07) in test -C. The t-value was 0.1239. But it was found to be statistically insignificant (p=0.005).
<bold>Conclusion:</bold>Within the limitation of this clinical study border molding custom tray with low fusing green stick compound provided similar retention as compared to custom impression tray with condensation silicone in permanent denture base.
<bold>How to cite this article:</bold>Yarapatineni R, Vilekar A, Kumar JP, Kumar GA, Aravind P, Kumar PA. Comparative evaluation of border molding, using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches - An in vivo study.
<italic>J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(6):82-7</italic>.
</p></div></front></TEI><pmc article-type="research-article"><pmc-comment>The publisher of this article does not allow downloading of the full text in XML form.</pmc-comment>
<front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="nlm-ta">J Int Oral Health</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="iso-abbrev">J Int Oral Health</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JIOH</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of International Oral Health : JIOH</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">0976-7428</issn><issn pub-type="epub">0976-1799</issn><publisher><publisher-name>International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="pmid">24453450</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="pmc">3895723</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Public Health Dentistry</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Comparative evaluation of border molding, using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches - An in vivo study</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Yarapatineni</surname><given-names>Rameshbabu</given-names></name><role>Reader</role><aff>Department of Prosthodontcics, Sree Sai Dental College and Research Institute Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India</aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Vilekar</surname><given-names>Abhishek</given-names></name><role>Senior Lecturer</role><aff>Department of Prosthodontics, Sree Sai Dental College and Research Institute Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India</aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>J Phani</given-names></name><role>Reader</role><aff>Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Meghana Institute of Dental Sciences, Nizamabad, Andhra Pradesh, India</aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>G Ajay</given-names></name><role>Reader</role><aff>Department of Prosthodontics, Army College of Dental Sciences, Secunderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India</aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Aravind</surname><given-names>Prasad</given-names></name><role>Reader</role><aff>Department of Prosthodontcics, MES Dental College, Malappuram, Kerala, India</aff></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name><surname>Kumar</surname><given-names>P Anil</given-names></name><role>Assistant Professor</role><aff>Department of Prosthodontics, Meghana Institute of Dental Sciences, Nizamabad, Andhra Pradesh, India</aff></contrib></contrib-group><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">Dr. Rameshbabu Yarapatineni. Department of Prosthodontcics, Sree Sai Dental College and Research Institute Srikakulam, Andhra Pradesh, India.
Email: <email>dryrameshbabu@yahoo.com</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>12</month><year>2013</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>12</month><year>2013</year></pub-date><volume>5</volume><issue>6</issue><fpage>82</fpage><lpage>87</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>16</day><month>8</month><year>2013</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>18</day><month>9</month><year>2013</year></date><date date-type="accepted"><day>21</day><month>10</month><year>2013</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>J. Int Oral Health 2013</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2013</copyright-year></permissions><abstract><p><bold>Background:</bold>This study was undertaken to compare the retention between sectional border molding using low fusing greenstick compound and single step border molding using condensation silicone (putty) impression material in three stages- A. Immediately following border molding, B. After final impression and C. With the finished permanent denture base.
<bold>Materials & Methods:</bold>In this study evaluation of retentive values of sectional border molding (Group I) (custom impression trays border molded with green stick compound ) and single step border molding (Group II) ( border molding with condensation silicone (putty) impression material ). In both techniques definitive wash impression were made with light body condensation silicone and permanent denture base with heat cure polymerization resin.
<bold>Results:</bold>Group II was significantly higher (mean=8011.43) than Group I (mean=5777.43) in test-A. The t-value (1.5883) infers that there was significant difference between Group I and Group II (p =0.15). Group I was significantly higher (mean=6718.57) than Group II (mean=5224.29) in test -B. The t-value (1.6909) infers that there was significant difference between Group I and Group II (p=0.17). Group II was higher (mean=4025.14) than Group I (mean=3835.07) in test -C. The t-value was 0.1239. But it was found to be statistically insignificant (p=0.005).
<bold>Conclusion:</bold>Within the limitation of this clinical study border molding custom tray with low fusing green stick compound provided similar retention as compared to custom impression tray with condensation silicone in permanent denture base.
<bold>How to cite this article:</bold>Yarapatineni R, Vilekar A, Kumar JP, Kumar GA, Aravind P, Kumar PA. Comparative evaluation of border molding, using two different techniques in maxillary edentulous arches - An in vivo study.
<italic>J Int Oral Health 2013; 5(6):82-7</italic>.
</p></abstract><kwd-group kwd-group-type="author"><label><bold>Key words:</bold>
</label><kwd>Low fusing compound</kwd><kwd>maxillary edentulous arches</kwd><kwd>sectional border molding</kwd><kwd>silicone (putty) impression material</kwd><kwd>single step border molding</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front></pmc></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Santé/explor/EdenteV2/Data/Pmc/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002437 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Pmc/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 002437 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Santé
|area= EdenteV2
|flux= Pmc
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé=
|texte=
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.32. |  |