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

Journal Abstract Search

240 related items for PubMed ID: 26632232

  • 21. Comparison of the dimensional stability of alginate impressions disinfected with 1% sodium hypochlorite using the spray or immersion method.
    Oderinu OH, Adegbulugbe IC, Shaba OP.
    Nig Q J Hosp Med; 2007; 17(2):69-73. PubMed ID: 18318096
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. [To bite or to scan? Dental impressions with alginate, PVS or -intra-oral scanning; processing time and patient comfort. A pilotstudy].
    Darroudi M, Ariens ZP, Zinsmeister VZ, Breuning KH.
    Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd; 2017 Feb; 124(2):91-95. PubMed ID: 28186514
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Three-dimensional evaluation of the repeatability of scans of stone models and impressions using a blue LED scanner.
    Jeon JH, Jung ID, Kim JH, Kim HY, Kim WC.
    Dent Mater J; 2015 Feb; 34(5):686-91. PubMed ID: 26438993
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance.
    Grünheid T, McCarthy SD, Larson BE.
    Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2014 Nov; 146(5):673-82. PubMed ID: 25439218
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Accuracy of Three Digitization Methods for the Dental Arch with Various Tooth Preparation Designs: An In Vitro Study.
    Oh KC, Lee B, Park YB, Moon HS.
    J Prosthodont; 2019 Feb; 28(2):195-201. PubMed ID: 30427097
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision.
    Ender A, Mehl A.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Feb; 109(2):121-8. PubMed ID: 23395338
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. A comparison of dimensional accuracy between three different addition cured silicone impression materials.
    Forrester-Baker L, Seymour KG, Samarawickrama D, Zou L, Cherukara G, Patel M.
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 2005 Jun; 13(2):69-74. PubMed ID: 16011234
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Factors affecting the accuracy of elastometric impression materials.
    Chen SY, Liang WM, Chen FN.
    J Dent; 2004 Nov; 32(8):603-9. PubMed ID: 15476954
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Impression technique for monitoring and virtual treatment planning in nasoalveolar moulding.
    Loeffelbein DJ, Rau A, Wolff KD.
    Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2013 Dec; 51(8):898-901. PubMed ID: 23414909
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Correlation between the degree of deformation of the stone die and the amount of the master die undercut. Part 1. Single tooth die.
    Murakami H, Takehana S, Abe T, Yamamoto Y, Takenaka M.
    Aichi Gakuin Dent Sci; 1989 Dec; 2():57-65. PubMed ID: 2701499
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. The effect of disinfecting alginate and addition cured silicone rubber impression materials on the physical properties of impressions and resultant casts.
    al-Omari WM, Jones JC, Wood DJ.
    Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent; 1998 Sep; 6(3):103-10. PubMed ID: 10218014
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. An in vitro comparison of the accuracy of implant impressions with coded healing abutments and different implant angulations.
    Al-Abdullah K, Zandparsa R, Finkelman M, Hirayama H.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2013 Aug; 110(2):90-100. PubMed ID: 23929370
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Three-dimensional evaluation of gaps associated with fixed dental prostheses fabricated with new technologies.
    Kim KB, Kim JH, Kim WC, Kim JH.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2014 Dec; 112(6):1432-6. PubMed ID: 25218032
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Accuracy of dies captured by an intraoral digital impression system using parallel confocal imaging.
    Kim SY, Kim MJ, Han JS, Yeo IS, Lim YJ, Kwon HB.
    Int J Prosthodont; 2013 Dec; 26(2):161-3. PubMed ID: 23476911
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Impact of digital impression techniques on the adaption of ceramic partial crowns in vitro.
    Schaefer O, Decker M, Wittstock F, Kuepper H, Guentsch A.
    J Dent; 2014 Jun; 42(6):677-83. PubMed ID: 24508541
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Accuracy of digitization obtained from scannable and nonscannable elastomeric impression materials.
    García-Martínez I, CáceresMonllor D, Solaberrieta E, Ferreiroa A, Pradíes G.
    J Prosthet Dent; 2021 Feb; 125(2):300-306. PubMed ID: 32089364
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Irreversible hydrocolloids for crown and bridge impressions: effect of different treatments on compatibility of irreversible hydrocolloid impression material with type IV gypsums.
    Eriksson A, Ockert-Eriksson G, Lockowandt P, Lindén LA.
    Dent Mater; 1996 Mar; 12(2):74-82. PubMed ID: 9002847
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 12.