Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
Research Article| Volume 88, ISSUE 3, P329-336, September 2002

Verification jig for implant-supported prostheses: A comparison of standard impressions with verification jigs made of different materials


      Statement of Problem. Implant verification jigs are routinely used during the fabrication of implant-supported prostheses. The dimensional accuracy of these jigs is unknown. Purpose. The purposes of this study were to (1) compare the dimensional accuracy of verification jigs with that of conventional impression procedures and (2) measure the dimensional accuracy of 3 resin materials used to fabricate verification jigs. Material and Methods. Thirty verification jigs and 20 impressions were made of 3 externally hexed Steri-Oss implants in a master stone base according to the following groups (n = 10 per group): (Group 1) Jig: GC pattern resin; (Group 2) Jig: Duralay resin; (Group 3) Jig: Triad gel resin; (Group 4) Impression: closed-tray impression copings; and (Group 5) Impression: open-tray impression copings. A stone base was fabricated for each experimental jig and impression. Master stone base and experimental stone bases were measured with the following methods: X and Y coordinates of each implant center were obtained with a traveling microscope by averaging the X and Y coordinates of the implant external hex corners. The origins of the coordinates during measurement of each base were arbitrary. Distances between implant center points were calculated by use of the Pythagorean theorem. Vertical measurements (Z-plane) were obtained with a digital caliper at the 2 terminal-implant locations. Interimplant distances and vertical measurements were subtracted from those of the master base, and the resultant distortion values were analyzed with analysis of variance and Tukey Studentized range tests. Statistical significance was set at P<.05. Results. Verification jigs were not significantly more accurate than standard impression procedures. Open-tray impressions showed a significantly greater vertical distortion (Z-R location: 262 ± 158 μm; P=.0001; Z-L location 333 ± 189; P=.0001) compared with the other groups. Triad gel jigs showed a significantly greater distortion in one interimplant distance (C-L) than closed-tray impressions (P=.04), whereas Duralay jigs exhibited significant greater distortion than closed-tray and open-tray impressions in the interimplant distance R-C (P=.006). Although not significantly different from other groups, the closed-tray group showed the lowest mean distortion values in all measurements. Conclusion. Within the limitations of this study, the accuracy provided by verification jigs was not significantly superior to standard impression procedures. The results suggest that jig fabrication does not improve the dimensional accuracy of stone casts. Open-tray impressions showed a significantly greater inaccuracy in the vertical plane. (J Prosthet Dent 2002;88:329-36.)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Zarb GA
        • Schmitt A
        The longitudinal clinical effectiveness of osseointegrated dental implants: the Toronto Study. Part II: The prosthetic results.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 64: 53-61
        • Quirynen M
        • Naert O
        • van Steenberghe D
        • Schepers E
        • Calberson L
        • Theuniers G
        • et al.
        The cumulative failure rate of the Branemark system in the overdenture, fixed partial, and the fixed full prosthesis design: a prospective study on 1,273 fixtures.
        J Head Neck Pathol. 1992; 10: 43-53
        • Branemark PI
        • Zarb GA
        • Albrektsson T
        Tissue integrated prostheses, osseointegration in clinical dentistry.
        in: : Quintessence, Chicago1988: 175
        • Zarb GA
        • Symington JM
        Osseointegrated dental implants: preliminary report on a replication study.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1983; 50: 271-276
        • Laney WR
        • Tolman DE
        • Keller EE
        • Desjardins RP
        • Van Roekel NB
        • Branemark PI
        Dental implants: tissue-integrated prosthesis utilizing the osseointegration concept.
        Mayo Clin Proc. 1986; 61: 91-97
        • Carr AB
        Comparison of impression techniques for a five-implant mandibular model.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1991; 6: 448-455
        • Assif D
        • Marshak B
        • Schmidt A
        Accuracy of implant impression techniques.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1996; 11: 216-222
        • Humphries RM
        • Yaman P
        • Bloem TJ
        The accuracy of implant master casts constructed from transfer impressions.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1990; 5: 331-336
        • Burawi G
        • Houston F
        • Byrne D
        • Claffey N
        A comparison of the dimensional accuracy of the splinted and unsplinted impression techniques for the bone-lock implant system.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1997; 77: 68-75
        • Spector MR
        • Donovan TE
        • Nicholls JI
        An evaluation of impression techniques for osseo-integrated implants.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 63: 444-447
        • Liou AD
        • Nicholls JI
        • Yuodelis RA
        • Brudvik JS
        Accuracy of replacing three tapered transfer impression copings in two elastomeric impression materials.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1993; 6: 377-383
        • Assif D
        • Nissan J
        • Varsano I
        • Singer A
        Accuracy of implant impression splinted techniques: effect of splinting material.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1999; 14: 885-888
        • Lorenzoni M
        • Pertl C
        • Penkner K
        • Polansky R
        • Sedaj B
        • Wegscheider A
        Comparison of the transfer precision of three different impression materials in combination with transfer caps for the Frialit-2 system.
        J Oral Rehabil. 2000; 27: 629-638
        • Worthington P
        • Bolender CL
        • Taylor TD
        The Swedish system of osseointegrated implants: problems and complications encountered during a 4-year trial period.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1987; 2: 77-84
        • Sones AD
        Complications with osseointegrated implants.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62: 581-585
        • Walton JN
        • MacEntee MI
        Problems with prostheses on implants: a retrospective study.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1994; 71: 283-288
        • Jemt T
        • Linden B
        • Lekholm U
        Failures and complications in 127 consecutively placed fixed partial prostheses supported by Branemark implants: from prosthetic treatment to first annual checkup.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1992; 7: 40-44
        • Brunski JB
        Influence of biomechanical factors at the bone-biomaterial interface.
        in: The bone biomaterial interface. : University of Toronto Press, Toronto1991: 391-405
        • Brunski JB
        Biomechanical factors affecting the bone-dental implant interface.
        Clin Mater. 1992; 10: 153-201
        • Brunski JB
        Biomechanical complications in dental implant design.
        Int J Oral Implantol. 1988; 5: 31-34
        • Skalak R
        Aspects of biomechanical considerations.
        in: Tissue integrated prostheses: osseointegration in clinical dentistry. : Quintessence, Chicago1985: 117-128
        • Brunski JB
        Forces on dental implants and interfacial stress transfer.
        in: Tissue integration in oral, orthopedic and maxillofacial reconstruction. : Quintessence, Chicago1992: 108-124
        • Kallus T
        • Bessing C
        Loose gold screws frequently occur in full-arch fixed prostheses supported by osseointegrated implants after 5 years.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994; 9: 169-178
        • Carr AB
        • Gerald DA
        • Larsen PE
        The response of bone in primates around unloaded dental implants supporting prostheses with different levels of fit.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1996; 76: 500-509
        • Kan JY
        • Rungcharassaeng K
        • Bohsali K
        • Goodacre CJ
        • Lang BR
        Clinical methods for evaluating implant framework fit.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1999; 81: 7-13
        • McCartney JW
        • Pearson R
        Segmental framework matrix: master cast verification, corrected cast guide, and analog transfer template for implant-supported prostheses.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1994; 71: 197-200
        • Henry PJ
        An alternative method for the production of accurate casts and occlusal records in osseointegrated implant rehabilitation.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1987; 58: 694-697
        • Hebel KS
        • Galindo D
        • Gajjar RC
        Implant position record and implant position cast: minimizing errors, procedures and patient visits in the fabrication of the milled-bar prosthesis.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 83: 107-116
        • Current Issues Forum
        How do you test a cast framework fit for a full-arch fixed implant-supported prosthesis.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1994; 9: 469-474
        • Patterson Jr, JC
        A technique for accurate soldering.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1972; 28: 552-556
        • Stackhouse Jr, JA
        Assembly of dental units by soldering.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1967; 18: 131-139
        • Moon PC
        • Eshleman JR
        • Douglas HB
        • Garrett SG
        Comparison of accuracy of soldering indices for fixed prostheses.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1978; 40: 35-38
        • Cho GC
        • Chee WW
        Efficient soldering index materials for fixed partial dentures and implant substructures.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1995; 73: 424-427
        • Papazian S
        • Morgano SM
        Use of aluminum strips to fabricate verification jig for an implant-supported fixed partial denture.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1998; 79: 350-352
        • Jacobson Z
        • Peterson T
        • Kim WD
        Positioning jig for implant abutments: procedures and clinical applications.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1996; 75: 435-439
        • Dumbrigue HB
        • Gurun DC
        • Javid NS
        Prefabricated acrylic resin bars for splinting implant transfer copings.
        J Prosthet Dent. 2000; 84: 108-110
        • Anusavice KJ
        Phillip's science of dental materials.
        in: 10th ed. : WB Saunders, Philadelphia1996: 254
        • Mojon P
        • Oberholzer JP
        • Meyer JM
        • Belser UC
        Polymerization shrinkage of index and pattern acrylic resins.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1990; 64: 684-688
        • Craig RG
        Restorative dental materials.
        in: 11th ed. : Mosby, St. Louis2002: 639
        • Ogle RE
        • Sorensen SE
        • Lewis EA
        A new visible light-cured resin system applied to removable prosthodontics.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1986; 56: 497-506
        • Harvey WL
        • Harvey EV
        Dimensional changes at the posterior border of baseplates made from a visible light-activated composite resin.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62: 184-189
        • Olvera N
        • de Rijk WG
        Effect of surface treatments on the repair strength of a light-activated denture repair resin using censored data.
        Dent Mater. 1994; 10: 122-127
        • Millstein P
        • Maya A
        • Segura C
        Determining the accuracy of stock and custom tray impression/casts.
        J Oral Rehabil. 1998; 25: 645-648
        • Boulton JL
        • Gage JP
        • Vincent PF
        • Basford KE
        A laboratory study of dimensional changes for three elastomeric impression materials using custom and stock trays.
        Aust Dent J. 1996; 41: 398-404
        • Dixon DL
        • Breeding LC
        • Brown JS
        The effect of custom tray material type and adhesive drying time on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1994; 7: 129-133
        • Dixon DL
        • Breeding LC
        • Bosser MJ
        • Nafso AJ
        The effect of custom tray material type and surface treatment on the tensile bond strength of an impression material/adhesive system.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1993; 6: 303-306
        • Nicholls JI
        The measurement of distortion: concluding remarks.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1980; 43: 218-223
        • Harper RJ
        • Nicholls JI
        Distortion in indexing methods and investing media for soldering and remount procedures.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1979; 42: 172-179
        • Nicholls JI
        The measurement of distortion: theoretical considerations.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1977; 37: 578-586
        • Nicholls JI
        The measurement of distortion: mathematical considerations.
        J Prosthet Dent. 1978; 39: 339-343
        • Craig RG
        Restorative dental materials.
        in: 11th ed. : Mosby, St. Louis2002: 640
        • Ma T
        • Nicholls JI
        • Rubenstein JE
        Tolerance measurements of various implant components.
        Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 1997; 12: 371-375
        • Binon PP
        Evaluation of machining accuracy and consistency of selected implants, standard abutments, and laboratory analogs.
        Int J Prosthodont. 1995; 8: 162-178