Research Article
Evaluation of One- and Two-Step Impression Techniques and Vertical Marginal Misfit in Fixed Prothesis
Table 1
The independent t-test results of the vertical marginal misfit comparing each surface between one-step and two-step techniques.
| Group | Mean (μm) | Std. deviation | value |
| Mesial of 2nd premolar, one-step technique | 137.8125 | 32.3716 | 0.001 | Mesial of 2nd premolar, two-step technique | 93.57 | 18.427 | Buccal of 2nd premolar, one-step technique | 123.845 | 19.141 | 0.001 | Buccal of 2nd premolar, two-step technique | 96.005 | 17.597 | Lingual of 2nd premolar, one-step technique | 141.468 | 44.571 | 0.019 | Lingual of 2nd premolar, two-step technique | 102.394 | 29.929 | Buccal of 2nd molar, one-step technique | 123.035 | 13.274 | 0.003 | Buccal of 2nd molar, two-step technique | 101.57 | 18.268 | Distal of 2nd molar, one-step technique | 119.945 | 24.768 | 0.0167 | Distal of 2nd molar, two-step technique | 98.967 | 13.233 | Lingual of 2nd molar, one-step technique | 112.16 | 22.505 | 0.009 | Lingual of 2nd molar, two-step technique | 82.436 | 28.526 |
|
|