These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
394 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18164051)
1. Surface detail reproduction of elastomeric impression materials related to rheological properties. German MJ; Carrick TE; McCabe JF Dent Mater; 2008 Jul; 24(7):951-6. PubMed ID: 18164051 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Recording surface detail on moist surfaces with elastomeric impression materials. McCabe JF; Carrick TE Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2006 Mar; 14(1):42-6. PubMed ID: 16599098 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Flow profile of regular and fast-setting elastomeric impression materials using a shark fin testing device. Lawson NC; Cakir D; Ramp L; Burgess JO J Esthet Restor Dent; 2011 Jun; 23(3):171-6. PubMed ID: 21649832 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Working time of elastomeric impression materials: relevance of rheological tests. Balkenhol M; Kanehira M; Finger WJ; Wöstmann B Am J Dent; 2007 Dec; 20(6):347-52. PubMed ID: 18269123 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The dynamic interaction of water with four dental impression materials during cure. Hosseinpour D; Berg JC J Prosthodont; 2009 Jun; 18(4):292-300. PubMed ID: 19210607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Changes in water contact angles during the first phase of setting of dental impression materials. Mondon M; Ziegler C Int J Prosthodont; 2003; 16(1):49-53. PubMed ID: 12675455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Moisture effect on polyether and polyvinylsiloxane dimensional accuracy and detail reproduction. Walker MP; Petrie CS; Haj-Ali R; Spencer P; Dumas C; Williams K J Prosthodont; 2005 Sep; 14(3):158-63. PubMed ID: 16336232 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Shark fin test and impression quality: a correlation analysis. Balkenhol M; Wöstmann B; Kanehira M; Finger WJ J Dent; 2007 May; 35(5):409-15. PubMed ID: 17254690 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Influence of prolonged setting time on permanent deformation of elastomeric impression materials. Balkenhol M; Haunschild S; Erbe C; Wöstmann B J Prosthet Dent; 2010 May; 103(5):288-94. PubMed ID: 20416412 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Accuracy of a new ring-opening metathesis elastomeric dental impression material with spray and immersion disinfection. Kronström MH; Johnson GH; Hompesch RW J Prosthet Dent; 2010 Jan; 103(1):23-30. PubMed ID: 20105678 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effect of relative humidity on the hydrophilicity of unset elastomeric impression materials. Rupp F; Axmann D; Geis-Gerstorfer J Int J Prosthodont; 2008; 21(1):69-71. PubMed ID: 18350951 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Detail reproduction, contact angles, and die hardness of elastomeric impression and gypsum die material combinations. Ragain JC; Grosko ML; Raj M; Ryan TN; Johnston WM Int J Prosthodont; 2000; 13(3):214-20. PubMed ID: 11203635 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Temperature effects on the rheological properties of current polyether and polysiloxane impression materials during setting. Berg JC; Johnson GH; Lepe X; Adán-Plaza S J Prosthet Dent; 2003 Aug; 90(2):150-61. PubMed ID: 12886208 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Hydrophilicity of unset and set elastomeric impression materials. Rupp F; Geis-Gerstorfer J Int J Prosthodont; 2010; 23(6):552-4. PubMed ID: 21209992 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]