Open hour: senin - sabtu 09:00:00 - 20:00:00; minggu & tanggal merah tutup
Methods : Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: in vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols [4]

Methods : Accuracy of static computer-assisted implant placement in anterior and posterior sites by clinicians new to implant dentistry: in vitro comparison of fully guided, pilot-guided, and freehand protocols [4]

author: Jaafar Abduo, Douglas Lau | publisher: drg. Andreas Tjandra, Sp. Perio, FISID

The vertical deviation was measured by calculating the discrepancy along the long axis of the planned implant at the center of the platform (Fig. 2a). In addition to the magnitude of the deviation, the direction of the error was determined. The horizontal deviations were measured at the neck and the apex of the planned implant. The angle deviation was computed by measuring the angle of the long axis of 2 implants. The direction of the angle deviation was measured by relating the apex location of the placed implant to the planned implant. Maximal, buccolingual, and mesiodistal deviations of the horizontal and angle deviations were determined (Fig. 2b).

For each variable, the mean and standard deviation (SD) were measured. After confirming the normality of the data, the one-way analysis of variance test was applied to determine the statistical difference among the groups. In the case of the presence of a significant difference, the Tukey post hoc test was applied. In addition, for each variable, the difference between the anterior and posterior implants was determined. All the statistical tests were conducted via the SPSS software package (SPSS for Windows, version 23, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). The level of significance was set at 0.05. The mesiodistal and buccolingual deviations of each implant of every protocol were blotted in scatter diagrams.

Serial posts:


id post:
New thoughts
Me:
search
glossary
en in