FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2337809312> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2337809312 endingPage "256" @default.
• W2337809312 startingPage "249" @default.
• W2337809312 abstract "Currently no data comparing the denture base adaptation of CAD-CAM and conventional denture processing techniques have been reported.The purpose of this in vitro study was to compare the denture base adaptation of pack and press, pour, injection, and CAD-CAM techniques for fabricating dentures to determine which process produces the most accurate and reproducible adaptation.A definitive cast was duplicated to create 40 gypsum casts that were laser scanned before any fabrication procedures were initiated. A master denture was made using the CAD-CAM process and was then used to create a putty mold for the fabrication of 30 standardized wax festooned dentures, 10 for each of the conventional processing techniques (pack and press, pour, injection). Scan files from 10 casts were sent to Global Dental Science, LLC for fabrication of the CAD-CAM test specimens. After specimens for each of the 4 techniques had been fabricated, they were hydrated for 24 hours and the intaglio surface laser scanned. The scan file of each denture was superimposed on the scan file of the corresponding preprocessing cast using surface matching software. Measurements were made at 60 locations, providing evaluation of fit discrepancies at the following areas: apex of the denture border, 6 mm from the denture border, crest of the ridge, palate, and posterior palatal seal. The use of median and interquartile range was used to assess accuracy and reproducibility. The Levine and Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance was used to evaluate differences between processing techniques at the 5 specified locations (α=.05).The ranking of results based on median and interquartile range determined that the accuracy and reproducibility of the CAD-CAM technique was more consistently localized around zero at 3 of the 5 locations. Therefore, the CAD-CAM technique showed the best combination of accuracy and reproducibility among the tested fabrication techniques. The pack and press technique was more accurate at 2 of the 5 locations; however, its interquartile range (reproducibility) was the greatest of the 4 tested processing techniques. The pour technique was the most reproducible at 2 of the 5 locations; however, its accuracy was the lowest of the tested techniques.The CAD-CAM fabrication process was the most accurate and reproducible denture fabrication technique when compared with pack and press, pour, and injection denture base processing techniques." @default.
• W2337809312 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2337809312 creator A5037170283 @default.
• W2337809312 creator A5069518735 @default.
• W2337809312 creator A5088069240 @default.
• W2337809312 creator A5088615294 @default.
• W2337809312 date "2016-08-01" @default.
• W2337809312 modified "2023-10-10" @default.
• W2337809312 title "Comparison of denture base adaptation between CAD-CAM and conventional fabrication techniques" @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1964367309 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1965176452 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1976694941 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1976744484 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1980509102 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W1986545246 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2002079735 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2018517025 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2018790311 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2037029247 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2037784347 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2039136702 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2061227585 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2092967783 @default.
• W2337809312 cites W2167109693 @default.
• W2337809312 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2016.02.017" @default.
• W2337809312 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27112416" @default.
• W2337809312 hasPublicationYear "2016" @default.
• W2337809312 type Work @default.
• W2337809312 sameAs 2337809312 @default.
• W2337809312 citedByCount "187" @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122016 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122017 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122018 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122019 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122020 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122021 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122022 @default.
• W2337809312 countsByYear W23378093122023 @default.
• W2337809312 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2337809312 hasAuthorship W2337809312A5037170283 @default.
• W2337809312 hasAuthorship W2337809312A5069518735 @default.
• W2337809312 hasAuthorship W2337809312A5088069240 @default.
• W2337809312 hasAuthorship W2337809312A5088615294 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C147176958 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C159985019 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C194789388 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C199639397 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C2776224884 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C2780062004 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C2780395129 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C2781448156 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C48777230 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C127413603 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C147176958 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C159985019 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C192562407 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C194789388 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C199343813 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C199639397 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C2776224884 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C2780062004 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C2780395129 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C2781448156 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C41008148 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C48777230 @default.
• W2337809312 hasConceptScore W2337809312C71924100 @default.
• W2337809312 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2337809312 hasLocation W23378093121 @default.
• W2337809312 hasLocation W23378093122 @default.
• W2337809312 hasOpenAccess W2337809312 @default.
• W2337809312 hasPrimaryLocation W23378093121 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2149020193 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2151935758 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2314725653 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2337809312 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2348965746 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2358386049 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2362856969 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2367488008 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2391059808 @default.
• W2337809312 hasRelatedWork W2417267265 @default.
• W2337809312 hasVolume "116" @default.
• W2337809312 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2337809312 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2337809312 magId "2337809312" @default.
• W2337809312 workType "article" @default.