Clinical Performance and Accuracy of Healing Abutment With Scan Peg for Single Posterior Implant-supported Restorations
Overview
- Phase
- N/A
- Intervention
- Not specified
- Conditions
- Dental Implants, Single-Tooth
- Sponsor
- Alexandria University
- Enrollment
- 24
- Locations
- 1
- Primary Endpoint
- Quality of proximal contacts of crowns fabricated by intraoral scanning of scan peg vs scan body
- Status
- Completed
- Last Updated
- last year
Overview
Brief Summary
The aim of this randomized clinical trial is to evaluate the clinical performance through prosthodontic, periodontal and radiographic evaluation of single screw-retained implant-supported restorations fabricated by intraoral scanning of healing abutment with scan peg in comparison to scan body
Detailed Description
Evaluation of the clinical performance through prosthodontic, periodontal and radiographic evaluation of single screw-retained implant-supported restorations fabricated by intraoral scanning of healing abutment with scan peg in comparison to scan body
Investigators
Rania Elsayed
Assistant Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry
Alexandria University
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
- •Adult patients who are classified as ASA I or II physical status and require mandibular single implants (single missing mandibular posterior teeth) with:
- •Adequate interarch and mesiodistal space.
- •Proper bone height and width.
- •Adequate zone of keratinized tissue (at least 2 mm)
Exclusion Criteria
- •Any systematic disease as uncontrolled diabetes mellitus or metabolic bone diseases
- •A history of head and neck radiation treatment.
- •Periodontal diseases.
- •Poor oral hygiene (Silness-Löe plaque index score 2 and 3) (32)
- •Parafunctional habits.
- •Malocclusion.
Outcomes
Primary Outcomes
Quality of proximal contacts of crowns fabricated by intraoral scanning of scan peg vs scan body
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
The proximal contacts will be evaluated with dental floss 1. Open: an open contact will be reported if there is no resistance against floss 2. Ideal: an ideal contact will be reported if there is some resistance to interproximal floss insertion. 3. Tight: a tight contact will be reported if it prevents the passage of floss through the proximal contact point. The percentage of proximal contacts will be calculated for each group at day of crown delivery, 3 months and 6 months later.
Scanning time (healing abutment-scan peg vs scan body)
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
The scanning time by intraoral scanner will be recorded in both groups
Evaluation of occlusion by digital occlusal analyzer
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
occlusal force of implant-supported restorations will be measured
Quality of occlusal contacts of crowns fabricated by intraoral scanning of scan peg vs scan body
Time Frame: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
An evaluation of occlusion will be executed with 2 layers of shim stock of 12µ. 1. No adjustment: if the shimstock is held when the patient clenches and does not need any adjustment. 2. Mild adjustment: If the shim stock is held after simple closure, the occlusal contact will be reported as heavy and received mild chairside adjustment. 3. Major adjustment: If the crown is returned to the manufacturing technician, the adjustment is considered major. 4. Out of occlusion: If the shim stock passes without resistance after clenching, an open contact will be reported. The percentage of occlusal contacts will be calculated for each group at day of crown delivery, 3 months and 6 months later.