Comparison of Three Final Impression Techniques for Severely Resorbed Mandibular Ridges

August 12, 2026 updated by: Nashwa ali saleh, Tanta University

Digital Evaluation of the Accuracy of Final Impressions Recorded by Three Different Techniques for Severely Resorbed Complete Mandibular Ridges: An In Vivo Crossover Study

This in vivo crossover study aims to compare the accuracy of three different final impression techniques for severely resorbed mandibular ridges in completely edentulous patients. The accuracy of the impressions will be evaluated digitally using three-dimensional scanning and deviation analysis to determine differences among the impression techniques.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

8

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Egypt
    • Gharbia Governorate
      • Tanta, Gharbia Governorate, Egypt
        • faculty of dentistry, Tanta university

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

-

Exclusion Criteria:Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Completely edentulous patients with severely resorbed mandibular ridges.
  2. Patients requiring a mandibular complete denture.
  3. Patients able to tolerate the impression procedures and attend the required study visits.
  4. Patients willing to participate in the study and provide informed consent.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patients with systemic or local conditions that contraindicate conventional dental impression procedures.
  2. Patients with pathological lesions or significant abnormalities affecting the mandibular denture-bearing area.
  3. Patients unable to tolerate or cooperate with the impression procedures.
  4. Patients who decline to participate or withdraw their informed consent. -

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Non-Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Convensional final impression
Conventional final impression technique using alginate impression material followed by zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) impression material.
Procedure: Conventional final impression
Conventional final impression technique using alginate impression material followed by zinc oxide eugenol (ZOE) impression material
Experimental: Wax impression technique
Wax impression technique using a wax impression followed by alginate impression material.
Procedure: Wax impression technique
Wax impression technique using a wax impression followed by alginate impression material.
Experimental: compound impression technique
Wash compound impression technique using a low-fusing impression compound wash followed by alginate impression material.
Procedure: Compound impression technique
Compound impression technique using a low fusing impression compound followed by alginate impression material.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
3D deviation (RMS) between final impression scans
Time Frame: Immediately after each final impression was recorded
The accuracy of the final impression techniques was assessed by three-dimensional deviation analysis of the impression scans using Geomagic Control software. Root Mean Square (RMS) deviation was calculated by comparing the scans obtained using the different impression techniques.
Immediately after each final impression was recorded

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Tanta University

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Nashwa Ali Saleh, PHD, Tanta University

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

December 12, 2024

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 23, 2025

Study Completion (Actual)

June 14, 2026

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 10, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 12, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

August 14, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 14, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 12, 2026

Last Verified

August 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • #R-PR-12-24-3160

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

IPD Plan Description

Individual participant data will not be shared with other researchers. Only aggregated study results will be reported.

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe