[Downloaded free from http://www.indjos.com on Monday, October 26, 2015, IP: 114.125.12.

137]

Original Article

A comparative study to evaluate

different impression technique in
relation to accuracy of the occlusal
plane in fixed partial denture
Roopa Kundur Thippanna, Roseline Meshramkar1, Suresh Sajjan2
Department of Prosthodontics, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, 1Department of Prosthodontics, S.D.M.
College of Dental Sciences and Hospital, Dharwad, Karnataka, 2Department of Prosthodontics, Vishnu Dental
College, Bhimavaram, AndhraPradesh, India
ABSTRACT

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare different impression
techniques in relation to accuracy of the occlusal plane.
Materials and Methods: Twenty impressions were made with different techniques and casts
were fabricated and discrepancy in the occlusal plane was measured using microcator. Five
impressions for each of the technique were made using polyvinyl silicone and impression poured
with typeIV die stone. The discrepancies in the occlusal plane were measured and compared.
Results: Casts poured with custom tray yielded the most accurate models from the impression
and the values were statistically significant.
Conclusion: Impression technique using custom tray yielded most accurate model from the
impressions. Among relining putty with spacer on the prepared area produced more variation
in occlusal plane.
Key words: Double mix impression, fixed partial denture, impression technique, occlusal plane, putty reline technique,
single step technique

Introduction
Address for Correspondence:
Dr.Roseline Meshramkar,
Department of Prosthodontics, S.D.M.
College of Dental Sciences and Hospital,
Dharwad - 580009, Karnataka, India.
E-mail:roselinemeshramkar
@yahoo.co.in
Date of Submission: 11032014
Date of Acceptance: 26092014

Access this article online

Website:
www.indjos.com
DOI:
10.4103/0976-6944.154605
Quick Response Code:

Over the past four decades tremendous

progress has been made in procedures for
making impressions for fixed prosthodontics.
The quality of fit of dental restorations is
mainly influenced by the accuracy of the
dental impressions. There are various
techniques for making fixed partial denture
(FPD) impressions.[1-6] These include the
following: (1) The single copper band
technique, (2) the monophase technique
(in which an impression material of only
1 viscosity is used), (3) the single-step
technique (in which impression materials of
2 viscosities are applied at the same time),
or (4) the double-step technique (in which
the impression is made in two steps, using
material of different viscosity in each step).
Livaditis G [7] compared the methods
and effectiveness of traditional FPD

22

impression system which includes the

matrix impression system in relation to
the registration of the finish lines and
sulci of the tooth preparations, very less
importance was given to the accuracy
of the occlusal plane and impression
techniques.
The putty reline methods have become more
popular among the dentists because of the
ease of handling when compared to custom
tray techniques. But due to the improper
seating of the tray and compressibility of
the putty material can lead to the variation
in interocclusal relations registration within
the impression.[8]
Although the bite registration method is
commonly used to record and transfer the
occlusal relations to the articulator,[9] minor
variations in the occlusal plane occur due
to the faulty impression procedure that
Indian Journal of Oral Sciences Vol. 6 Issue 1 Jan-Apr 2015

[Downloaded free from http://www.indjos.com on Monday, October 26, 2015, IP: 114.125.12.137]
Thippanna, et al.: Impression techniques and occlusal plane in FPD

are often unnoticed. This results in a variation in occlusal

contacts while doing the clinical trials although it appears
to be acceptable in the articulator. The ability to identify
and analyze inaccurate impressions and to understand how
to avoid them is key to successful restoration. Many studies
on impression accuracy have been published. Only a few
studies reported on the quality of the impressions and its
relation to the occlusal plane. Therefore, the purpose of
this study is to do a comparative evaluation of different
impression techniques in relation to accuracy of the
occlusal plane.

First a preliminary impression was made with putty

material. Later the material was scooped off from the
prepared tooth area to provide space for light body. The
final impression was made by injecting the light body over
the prepared tooth area and impression area. The putty
impression was reseated on the model. The impression
was removed after setting of the light body.

Materials and Methods

GroupIII Putty impression with spacer on prepared area

and relining:

In the present study, three putty-wash impression

techniques and single step impression technique using
custom tray have been used.
Materials

Master model, containing three complete crown FPD

abutment preparations
Six metal copings, three each of 1 and 2mm thickness.
Polyethylene separating sheets
Perforated metal tray
Addition silicone impression material. (Flextime,
Heraeus Kulzer)(easy putty and light-bodied polyvinyl
siloxane)
Tray adhesive (Heraeus Kulzer, universal adhesive)
Die stone (Kalrock, super hard die stone class IV,
Kalabhai Karson, Mumbai)
Debubblizer (Dentofill).
Armamentarium

Vaccum mixer
Automatic mixing syringe and dispensing gun
(Heraeus Kulzer)
Vibrator
Rubber bowl
Mixing spatula
Base former
Microcator (Company name).

GroupII Putty impression with complete reline:

This method was similar to above mentioned technique
except that the relining was done throughout the arch.

This was also similar to first technique but the space for
light body was gained by placing polythene spacer.
GroupIV Single impression technique using custom tray:
Medium and light body materials were used. Both the
materials were mixed simultaneously on different paper
pads. The medium body was loaded onto the tray and
the light body into the syringe. The syringe material was
injected onto the area of preparation. The tray was then
seated over the model. Both the materials set together to
produce a single impression.
For each technique five impressions were made using
a polyvinyl siloxane (addition silicon material). The
impressions were poured in die stone (type IV) with a
water: Powder ratio as recommended by the manufacturer.
All of the variables involved in the impression techniques
and cast production were carefully standardized.
Method of evaluation

A frasco model of maxillary arch with typhodont teeth was

taken. The maxillary first molar right side was prepared for
a full cast crown. Aslot was prepared using sticky wax in
the palatal region to facilitate the placement of the metal
block. Thus the prepared model was used as a standard
model. The impressions were made using the standard
model without the block.

To assess the accuracy of the occlusal plane, die models were

compared to that of the standard frasaco model. Reference
points were established on the buccal aspect of the first
molar in between the cusp tips on both left and right side.
The measurements were done by using MICROCATOR
[Figure1] instrument. The sensitivity of this instrument
is of 0.001mm. The metal block was inserted into the slot
created in the model. All the measurements were done from
the fixed point [Figures2 and 3]. From this point the heights
onto the right and left side were measured [Figures 4
and 5]. The difference between the right and left side on
the standard model was taken as standard reading to find
the discrepancy from each technique. All the measurements
carried out were in millimeters.

Grouping of impressions

Results

The impressions were categorized into four groups as

follows:
GroupI Putty impression with reline on prepared area:
Indian Journal of Oral Sciences Vol. 6 Issue 1 Jan-Apr 2015

The readings from the four experimental techniques

were independently analyzed using analysis of variance
23

[Downloaded free from http://www.indjos.com on Monday, October 26, 2015, IP: 114.125.12.137]
Thippanna, et al.: Impression techniques and occlusal plane in FPD

Figure 1: Microcator

Figure 2: Metal block placed on the die model

Figure 3: Instrument in position on the metal block

Figure 4: Measurement of an unprepared tooth

Figure 5: Measurement of a prepared tooth

(ANOVA). Differences between the different techniques

were found out. Of all the techniques studied the
occlusal plane was either elevated or depressed which
intern results in altered occlusal contacts. Figure6 shows
the variation range, mean discrepancy of occlusal plane
24

Figure 6: Discrepancy of range, mean and SD of different impression

techniques

and standard deviation of the different impression

techniques. The values for impression techniques
Indian Journal of Oral Sciences Vol. 6 Issue 1 Jan-Apr 2015

[Downloaded free from http://www.indjos.com on Monday, October 26, 2015, IP: 114.125.12.137]
Thippanna, et al.: Impression techniques and occlusal plane in FPD

I, II, III and IV were 0.831, 1.033, 1.085 and 0.598

respectively.

Discussion
The science of occlusion encompasses more than mere
interrelationship of teeth. It involves the stomatognathic
system in health and disease.[10] Failure to restore tooth
anatomy can lead to disturbed occlusal function and painful
muscles. If the restoration is to fit precisely the die on which
it is made must be accurate which requires an acceptable
impression.[8] A clinically acceptable impression technique is
one according to Dr.Tjan et al.,[11] that produces an accurate
die which shows the least variation. In the present study
four different commonly used elastomeric impression
techniques (putty-reline and custom tray) were compared
in relation to the accuracy of the occlusal plane.
Addition silicon impression material was used to make
impression as this material was shown to be dimensionally
stable with time, no reaction products are produced
and polymerization is complete when the impression is
removed.[12] The impressions were poured with type IV
dental stone as additional silicon (polyvinyl siloxane)
material showed to have greater compatibility with typeIV
dental stone.[13]
Figure 6 shows the variation in the occlusal plane for
the impression techniques. Group III (space provided
by polyethylene spacer) showed more variation (1.085)
where as Group IV impression technique using custom
tray showed least variation (0.598). The present study is
not in accordance with Hung et al..[14] and Idris et al.,[6]
who reported that impression accuracy is not technique
dependent.
Overall the relining technique showed more variation.
This could be because of some errors during impression
procedure as listed by (Barry Marshak)[15] which lead
inaccurate impression:
An excess bulk of wash material can result in dimensional
changes proportional to the thickness of the material
during setting
Undercuts or projections into the putty affect the
accuracy of the impression.

Summary and Conclusion

This invitro study was conducted to evaluate and assess four
different impression techniques in relation to the accuracy
of the occlusal plane.

Indian Journal of Oral Sciences Vol. 6 Issue 1 Jan-Apr 2015

The following conclusions were drawn from this study:

The single step technique using custom tray with 2
viscosities yielded the most accurate models from the
impressions
Among relining techniques the putty with spacer on the
prepared area and relining produced more variations in
occlusal plane.
However, the selection of a specific technique depends
on evaluation of an individual patient and experience of
the dentist.

References
1.
2.
3.
4.

5.

6.

7.

8.
9.
10.

11.

12.
13.

14.

15.

Chee WW, Donovan TE. Polyvinyl siloxane impression materials:

Areview of properties and techniques. JProsthet Dent 1992;68:728-32.
Millar B. How to make a good impression (crown and bridge). Br Dent
J 2001;191:402-5.
Messing JJ. Copper band technique. Br Dent J 1965;119:246-8.
Gelbard S, Aoskar Y, Zalkind M, Stern N. Effect of impression materials
and techniques on the marginal fit of metal castings. JProsthet Dent
1994;71:1-6.
Thongthammachat S, Moore BK, Barco MT 2nd, Hovijitra S,
Brown DT, Andres CJ. Dimensional accuracy of dental casts: Influence of
tray material, impression material, and time. JProsthodont 2002;11:98-108.
Idris B, Houston F, Claffey N. Comparison of the dimensional accuracy
of one-and two-step techniques with the use of putty/wash addition
silicone impression materials. JProsthet Dent 1995;74:535-41.
Haim M, Luthardt RG, Rudolph H, Koch R, Walter MH, Quaas S.
Randomized controlled clinical study on the accuracy of two-stage putty
and wash impression materials. JProsthet Dent 2009;22:296-301.
Herbert SL. Fundamentals of fixed Prosthodontics. Illinois: Quintessence
Publishing. co. inc. 3rd Edition,1997; 281-304.
Livaditis GJ. Comparision of new matrix system with traditional fixed
prosthodontics impression procedures. JProsthet Dent 1998;79:200-207.
Malone WF, Tylman SD, Koth DL. Tylmans Theory and practice of
fixed Prosthodontics. 8thed. Missouri: Ishiyaku Euro America; 1989.
p. 237-54.
Tjan AH, Whang B, Tjan AH. Clinically oriented assessment of the
accuracy of three putty-wash silicones impression techniques. JAm Dent
Assoc 1984;108:973-5.
Johnson GH, Craig RG. Accuracy of addition silicones as a function of
technique. JProsthet Dent 1986;55:197-203.
Schelb E, Mazzocco CV, Jones JD, Prihoda T. Compatibility of typeIV
dental stones with polyvinyl siloxane impression materials. JProsthet
Dent 1987;58:19-22.
Hung SH, Purk JH, Tira DE, Eick JD. Accuracy of one-step versus twostep putty-wash addition silicon impression technique. JProsthet Dent
1992;67:583-9.
Marshak B, Assif D, Pilo R. A controlled putty- wash impression
technique. JProsthet Dent 1990;64:635-6.

How to cite this article: Thippanna RK, Meshramkar R, Sajjan S.

A comparative study to evaluate different impression technique in
relation to accuracy of the occlusal plane in fixed partial denture. Indian
J Oral Sci 2015;6:22-5.
Source of Support: Nil, Conflict of Interest: None declared

25