899 resultados para Models performance


Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas . Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Faculdade de Educação Física

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The aim of this study was to comparatively assess dental arch width, in the canine and molar regions, by means of direct measurements from plaster models, photocopies and digitized images of the models. The sample consisted of 130 pairs of plaster models, photocopies and digitized images of the models of white patients (n = 65), both genders, with Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusions, treated by standard Edgewise mechanics and extraction of the four first premolars. Maxillary and mandibular intercanine and intermolar widths were measured by a calibrated examiner, prior to and after orthodontic treatment, using the three modes of reproduction of the dental arches. Dispersion of the data relative to pre- and posttreatment intra-arch linear measurements (mm) was represented as box plots. The three measuring methods were compared by one-way ANOVA for repeated measurements (α = 0.05). Initial / final mean values varied as follows: 33.94 to 34.29 mm / 34.49 to 34.66 mm (maxillary intercanine width); 26.23 to 26.26 mm / 26.77 to 26.84 mm (mandibular intercanine width); 49.55 to 49.66 mm / 47.28 to 47.45 mm (maxillary intermolar width) and 43.28 to 43.41 mm / 40.29 to 40.46 mm (mandibular intermolar width). There were no statistically significant differences between mean dental arch widths estimated by the three studied methods, prior to and after orthodontic treatment. It may be concluded that photocopies and digitized images of the plaster models provided reliable reproductions of the dental arches for obtaining transversal intra-arch measurements.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Dental impression is an important step in the preparation of prostheses since it provides the reproduction of anatomic and surface details of teeth and adjacent structures. The objective of this study was to evaluate the linear dimensional alterations in gypsum dies obtained with different elastomeric materials, using a resin coping impression technique with individual shells. A master cast made of stainless steel with fixed prosthesis characteristics with two prepared abutment teeth was used to obtain the impressions. References points (A, B, C, D, E and F) were recorded on the occlusal and buccal surfaces of abutments to register the distances. The impressions were obtained using the following materials: polyether, mercaptan-polysulfide, addition silicone, and condensation silicone. The transfer impressions were made with custom trays and an irreversible hydrocolloid material and were poured with type IV gypsum. The distances between identified points in gypsum dies were measured using an optical microscope and the results were statistically analyzed by ANOVA (p < 0.05) and Tukey's test. The mean of the distances were registered as follows: addition silicone (AB = 13.6 µm, CD=15.0 µm, EF = 14.6 µm, GH=15.2 µm), mercaptan-polysulfide (AB = 36.0 µm, CD = 36.0 µm, EF = 39.6 µm, GH = 40.6 µm), polyether (AB = 35.2 µm, CD = 35.6 µm, EF = 39.4 µm, GH = 41.4 µm) and condensation silicone (AB = 69.2 µm, CD = 71.0 µm, EF = 80.6 µm, GH = 81.2 µm). All of the measurements found in gypsum dies were compared to those of a master cast. The results demonstrated that the addition silicone provides the best stability of the compounds tested, followed by polyether, polysulfide and condensation silicone. No statistical differences were obtained between polyether and mercaptan-polysulfide materials.