|
Quality of Final Impressions and Laboratory Prescriptions for Fixed Prosthodontics: A Cross-Sectional Study in Sanandaj
|
Shiva Mahboubi1    , Soma Fathi2 , Arian Azadnia3 |
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Dental Prosthetics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran , shiva.mahboobi62@gmail.com
2- Dentist, Faculty of Dentistry, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran
3- Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Research Institute for Health Development, Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences, Sanandaj, Iran |
|
|
Abstract: (187 Views) |
Background and Aim: Impression quality is a critical determinant of success in fixed prosthodontics. A precise impression should replicate the prepared surfaces and finish line. Any error at this stage will result in a misfit of the final prosthesis. A complete laboratory prescription is necessary for prosthesis fabrication. This study evaluated the quality of final impressions for fixed prostheses and the laboratory prescriptions submitted to dental laboratories in Sanandaj, Iran, during 2024–2025.
Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, a checklist comprising three demographic items, eight items concerning the impression characteristics, and nine items measuring the quality of laboratory prescriptions was used. A total of 320 fixed prosthodontic impressions and laboratory prescriptions submitted to dental laboratories in Sanandaj, Iran, were assessed. Data were analyzed using SPSS Software (version 26). The significance level was set at p < 0.05.
Results: Condensation silicone was used in 76% (n = 243) of impressions, whereas 24% (n = 77) used addition silicone. Perforated prefabricated plastic trays were the most frequently used. Contamination was observed in 51.9% of submitted impressions. Overall, 86.6% of the definitive impressions showed at least one visible flaw, incomplete reproduction of the finish line being the most frequent flaw (60.6%). None of the laboratory prescriptions were classified as either »clear« and »unguided«, whereas 75.3% were classified as »guided«.
Conclusion: The quality of final impressions for fixed prostheses and laboratory work authorizations was not desirable. These results emphasize the need for continued education on proper impression techniques and submission of complete laboratory work authorizations by dentists is essential. |
|
| Keywords: Dental laboratory, Dentist, Fixed prosthesis, Impression making, Laboratory prescription |
|
|
Full-Text [PDF 938 kb]
(79 Downloads)
|
Type of Study: Applicable |
Subject:
Dentistry
Received: 2026/07/9 | Accepted: 2026/08/25 | Published: 2026/09/26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
