Evaluation of Pre-Alginate Impression Preparation Methods on the Surface Accuracy of Dental Casts

Wajeeha  Parveen; Saad  Khan; Aleeha  Zahoor; Khadija Irshad; Ayesha  Masood; Ayesha  Iftikhar

doi:10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-7.13851

Authors

Wajeeha Parveen Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan
Saad Khan Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan
Aleeha Zahoor Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan
Khadija Irshad Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan
Ayesha Masood Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan
Ayesha Iftikhar Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry/National University of Medical Sciences (NUMS), Rawalpindi Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51253/pafmj.v76iSUPPL-7.13851

Keywords:

Alginate, Dental Cast, Finger Smearing, Impression, Nodules, Saliva Ejection

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the influence of pre-alginate impression preparation techniques (finger smearing and saliva ejection) on the quality and accuracy of dental casts.

Study Design: Quasi-experimental study.

Place and Duration of Study: Department of Prosthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (AFID), Rawalpindi, Pakistan from Nov 2024 to Apr 2025.

Methodology: An equivalent number of healthy men and women were selected through convenience sampling. Each patient underwent two mandibular impressions with stock trays on the same day. In Group-1 (Test), the oral cavity was dried with a saliva ejector and cotton rolls, and alginate was finger-smeared over occlusal surfaces before tray placement. In Group-2 (Control), patients rinsed their oral cavity with plain water, and after 20 minutes, impressions were taken without drying or finger smearing. Occlusal surface defects were measured and classified as Type A (≤500 µm), Type B (501–999 µm), and Type C (≥1000 µm). Data were analyzed using SPSS software version 23.

Results: In present study, 20 healthy adults (10 males, 10 females) between 20 and 40 years were included. Group-1 had 199 nodules, while Group-2 had 207 nodules. The groups' nodule size distribution differed statistically significantly (p<0.001), and Group-2 had a greater frequency of clinically significant Type C defects, suggesting that pre-impression preparation techniques improved surface accuracy.

Conclusion: Pre-preparation techniques of saliva ejection, drying, and finger smearing substantially reduce large surface defects on casts, thereby improving their quality and ensuring a more accurate fit of dental restorations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. The Glossary of Prosthodontic Terms 2023: Tenth Edition. J Prosthet Dent 2023; 130(4 Suppl 1): e1-e3.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2023.03.003

2. Kurtzman GM, Strassler HE. Identification and correction of common impression concerns: protocol and considerations. Pract Proced Aesthet Dent 2004; 16(5): 377-382.

3. Papadiochos I, Papadiochou S, Emmanouil I. The Historical Evolution of Dental Impression Materials. J Hist Dent 2017; 65(2): 79-89.

4. Niyazi AA, Alabrash MA, Elzouhiry MS, AlFarra RM, Althubyani NM, Huraib WM, et al. Comparative Analysis of Alginate Dimensional Stability with Varied Pouring Intervals. J Pharm Bioallied Sci 2024; 16 (Suppl 5): S4599-S4603.

https://doi.org/10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_762_24

5. Topouzelis N, Kotsiomiti E, Arhakis A. An alternative impression technique for individuals with special care needs. Spec Care Dentist 2010; 30(6): 266-270.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-4505.2010.00165.x

6. Decky J. Indrani and Niti Matram. Changes in setting time of alginate impression material with different water temperatures. Dent J 2013; 46(1): 5–8.

https://doi.org/10.20473/j.djmkg.v46.i1.p5-8

7. Arora N, Arora M, Gupta N, Agarwal M, Verma R, Rathod P. Clinical Evaluation of Different Pre-impression Preparation Procedures of Dental Arch. J Int Oral Health 2015; 7(7): 80-84.

8. Harris, W.T., 1969. Water temperature and accuracy of alginate impressions. J Prosthet Dent 1969; 21: 613–617.

9. Shaba OP, Adegbulugbe IC, Oderinu OH. Dimensional stability of alginate impression material over a four hours’ time frame. Nig Q J Hosp Med 2007; 17(1): 1-4.

https://doi.org/10.4314/nqjhm.v17i1.12531

10. Wadhwa SS, Mehta R, Duggal N, Vasudeva K. The effect of pouring time on the dimensional accuracy of casts made from different irreversible hydrocolloid impression materials. Contemp Clin Dent 2013; 4(3): 313-318.

https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-237X.118368

11. Al Qahtani MA, Alrefaie M, Altamimi A, Aljowyed I, Al Qahtani MA, AlQahtani A, et al. Evaluation of pre-alginate impression preparation methods in the surface accuracy of dental cast. Saudi Dent J 2019; (4): 451–456.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2019.04.005

12. Cowan C. Occlusal records in the production of mounted study casts for tooth wear planning and management. Br Dent J 2023; 234(6): 385-392.

http://https//doi.org/ 10.1038/s41415-023-5674-5683

13. Lim PF, Neo KH, Sitoh L, Yeo KL, Stokes A. Adaptation of finger-smoothed irreversible hydrocolloid to impression surfaces. Int J Prosthodont 1995; 8(2): 117-1121.

14. Karthigeyan S, Ashraf Ali S, Deivanai M, Nimmi. Diagnostic Cast- A Forgotten Diagnostic Tool. Pak Oral Dent J 2014; 34(1): 184-189.

15. Scotti R, Lugli M, D'Elia A. Reliability of antagonistic arch impression in dental prostheses: clinical evaluation of different preimpression preparation procedures. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 74(2): 127-132.

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3913(05)80174-x

16. Nandini VV, Venkatesh KV, Nair KC. Alginate impressions: A practical perspective. J Conserv Dent. 2008; 11(1): 37-41.

https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-0707.43416

17. Alaghari S, Velagala S, Alla RK, Ramaraju AV. Advances in alginate impression materials: a review. Int J Dent Mater 2019; 1(2): 55-59.

https://doi.org/10.37983/IJDM.2019.1203

18. McDaniel TF, Kramer RT, Im F, Snow D. Effects of mixing technique on bubble formation in alginate impression material. Gen Dent 2013; 61(6): 35-39.

19. Rubel BS. Impression materials: a comparative review of impression materials most commonly used in restorative dentistry. Dent Clin North Am. 2007; 51(3): 629-42, VI.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cden.2007.03.006

20. McCullagh, A., Sweet, C., Ashley, M. Making a good impression (A ‘How to’Paper on Dental Alginate). Dent Update 2005; 32(3): 169–175.

https://doi.org/10.12968/denu.2005.32.3.169

21. Irfan UB, Aslam K, Nadim R. A review on cad cam in dentistry. J Pak Dent Assoc 2015; 24(3): 112- 116.

22. Suganna M, Kausher H, Tarek Ahmed S, Sultan Alharbi H, Faraj Alsubaie B, Ds A, et al. Contemporary Evidence of CAD-CAM in Dentistry: A Systematic Review. Cureus 2022; 14 (11): e31687.

https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.31687