Retentive force of adjustable dental impression trays with different retention forms.
- Author:
Kie Bum SONG
1
;
Sung Rok KIM
;
Kwang Soo PARK
;
Yu Lee KIM
;
Jin Keun DONG
Author Information
1. Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Wonkwang University, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Adjustable dental impression trays;
Retention form;
Alginate
- MeSH:
Dental Arch
- From:The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
2005;43(1):15-29
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The adjustable dental impression trays were made for being adjusted their width automatically along the width of dental arch. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the best retentive form of adjustable dental impression tray, and so to make it a more satisfactory product. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The eight pairs of adjustable trays were made of ABS(acrylonitrile butadiene styrene) with different distribution of holes and with or without the rim on the border area of them. The experiment was done with the horse-shoe shaped metal plate to pull out the set impression body from the tray, and the tray jig which was made for holding the tray on a lower part of Universal Testing achine(UTM, Zwick Z020, Zwick Co., Germany). After the impression in the tray was allowed to set four minutes, a tensile force was applied at right angles to the tray which had been previously seated on the jig. The force was applied to measure a maximum retentive force by use of a UTM at a constant strain rate of 100mm per minute. A 2-factor analysis of variance (p<.05) was used to determine whether differences existed among distribution of retentive holes and between rim existing and not. RESULTS: 1. The retentive force of the upper and lower resin tray with 2mm holes on the tray border was highest(25.83/24.98kg).(p<.05) 2. As the tray had more retentive holes, it was less retentive. 3. There was no significant difference in the retentive force of the varied hole intervals in the case of distributing all the area.(p>.05) 4. The rimless trays were more retentive generally, than the rimmed trays except 2 case: upper tray group-all area / 2 mm. intervals and lower tray group-margin only / 2 mm. intervals.(p<.05) 5. Most of the adjustable trays were showed higher retentive force than perforated metal tray except the lower group that perforated on the all area at intervals of 2 mm.
