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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The occlusal precision of laboratory versus CAD/CAM processed all-ceramic crowns.
    Author: Reich S, Brungsberg B, Teschner H, Frankenberger R.
    Journal: Am J Dent; 2010 Feb; 23(1):53-6. PubMed ID: 20437729.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: The null hypothesis was tested: There is no difference between two all-ceramic crown systems, the Cerec method (CHAIR) and the IPS Empress method (LAB), with respect to occlusal precision and time expenditure for the dentist. METHODS: 20 casts representing clinical situations were mounted in semi-adjustable articulators to serve as simulation models. The left lower first molars were prepared to receive feldspathic ceramic crowns. The minimum number of three (Min3) occlusal contacts and their desired location was defined on each crown before preparation. Two crowns were produced on each die: (CHAIR) was applied in order to simulate a chair-side treatment and [LAB] was applied to simulate the laboratory/clinical mode of production. Additionally the time required to perform the occlusal adjustment was measured. For occlusal analysis, the (Min3) were divided by the contacts that were "actually achieved" (ACT). Mean quotients for (LAB) and (CHAIR) were calculated (n = 20 each). The Wilcoxon signed rank test at P < or = 0.05 was applied to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: The mean quotients MEAN QU (Min3)/(ACT) of 0.87 for (CHAIR) and 0.94 for (LAB) and the time expenditure for simulating intraoral occlusal adjustment of 3.44 minutes for (CHAIR) and 3.79 minutes for (LAB) did not differ significantly.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]