However, although this may eliminate some of the bacteria attached to the surface of a dental impression, a considerable proportion still remains. ĭaily dental practice often involves washing impression materials with tap water, as the Advisory British Dental Association Service recommended. Therefore, there is a possibility that the dimensions of the dental cast prosthesis may vary, which will eventually have an effect on how well the final restoration will fit. Although immersion disinfection minimizes the danger of cross-infection, changes in the dimensions of impression materials and a detrimental influence on the quality of the resultant cast have been often recorded. On the other hand, the immersion approach is recommended by the American Dental Association (ADA) because it permits the direct contact with disinfection solutions on all surfaces of the impression. Disinfection procedures such as spraying and immersion of imprint material are widely used. Dentists, dental assistants, and laboratory employees might be exposed to the infectious diseases due to this, which could lead to cross-contamination. When dental impressions come into contact with the oral tissue with blood, saliva, or plaque, they are almost probably contaminated with potentially dangerous germs. Within the study's limits, 2% glutaraldehyde showed safe for 10 minutes of immersion disinfection, whereas immersion in 200 ppm hypochlorous acid for 15 minutes shows promise as an efficient disinfectant without compromising the polyether's wettability or surface roughness.ĭental impressions are used to precisely record and duplicate the shape of teeth as well as the connection of teeth to the other oral structures in the mouth of the patient. The results of this study show that wettability and surface roughness of polyether impression material indicate a non-significant difference as compared with the control group (P>0.05). The data were submitted to a 5% variance significance analysis threshold. The wettability of the specimens was determined by measuring the contact angle with a Goniometer, while surface roughness was determined using a digital Profilometer.

The control group did not get any disinfection. The specimens were submerged in two disinfection solutions: 2% glutaraldehyde and 200 ppm hypochlorous acid.

A ring mold with a diameter of 30 mm and a thickness of 6 mm was used to prepare the specimens. 60 polyether dental impression material specimens (Monophase Impregum, 3MESPE, Germany) were randomly categoried into three test groups of ten specimens for each test. This study aimed to investigate how the wettability and surface roughness of polyether impression material changed after being immersed in two disinfectants (2% glutaraldehyde for 10 min and 200 ppm hypochlorous acid for 15 min.). Nevertheless, the disinfectants may affect the wettability and surface roughness qualities. Dental impression can be contaminated through contact with patient's saliva, blood, or plaque and cross-contamination is avoided by disinfecting impression materials.

Dental impression disinfectant spray