الفهرس 
Introduction .Only 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 195 |  |  |
| | | from | 195 | | |
Abstract
In this study, 7 patients were evaluated for restoring missing 1st permanent molar using 3 unit FDP with 3 different occlusal recording methods. A total of 21 FDP were done for all patients in which each one received 3 PMMA FDP of the variant occlusal recording methods. The data were compared with patient adapted occlusion data recorded prior any dental procedure using quantitative digital occlusal analysis (Occlusense) and qualitative using articulating papers.
group C: (conventional) received conventional FDP using facebow and semi adjustable articulator.
group M: (mathematically simulated) in which the articulator was scanned using extra oral lab scanner and the numerical data of Bennet and condylar angel was transferred to the virtual articulator in the CAD software in order to simulate patient jaw movements.
group P: (patient specific motion) in which the patient specific jaw movement was tracked using IOS Trios 3 and the STL data sent to the CAD software in order to make the design according to patient dynamic jaw movement.
All the FDP of the 3 systems were checked again for premature contact using digital occlusal analyzer by comparison of the occlusal records of the saved patient adapted occlusion with the new FDP.
Patient subjective analysis was checked using questionnaire to correlate the data with the occlusal recording via Occlusense.
The data was collected and sent for statistical analysis. Results revealed no statistically significant differences between the three methods of
105
Summary
occlusal recording techniques as all of the tested groups showing clinically accepted occlusal errors. Finally, the PMMA FDP that exhibit least occlusal errors was converted into monolithic zirconia FDP.