An International Publisher for Academic and Scientific Journals
Author Login 
Scholars Journal of Dental Sciences | Volume-13 | Issue-08
Assessment of Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Regarding Impression Materials and Techniques Used in Fixed Prosthodontics Among Dental Students in Maharashtra: A Cross-Sectional Survey
Gauri Phansalkar, Vishwas Kharsan, Saurabh Sarode, Harshit Agarwal, Ankush Jadhav, Rosy Shamkule, Priyanka Chaugule
Published: Aug. 3, 2026 | 39 21
Pages: 132-138
Downloads
Abstract
Background: Accurate impression making is fundamental to the success of fixed prosthodontic treatment. It requires appropriate knowledge of impression materials, tray selection, gingival displacement, and clinical handling techniques. Since dental students are introduced to these principles during undergraduate and postgraduate training, evaluating their knowledge, attitude, and practice can help identify gaps in teaching and clinical preparedness. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey was conducted among dental students from government and private dental colleges across Maharashtra, India. The study included III BDS students, IV BDS students, interns, and postgraduate students who had received training in fixed prosthodontics. Data were collected using a validated self-administered questionnaire. Responses related to knowledge, attitude, and practice of impression materials and techniques were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Associations between academic year and selected variables were assessed using chi-square and non-parametric tests, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 500 responses were analyzed. IV BDS students constituted the largest proportion of respondents (34.4%), followed by postgraduate students (32.4%). More than half of the participants routinely made diagnostic impressions before tooth preparation (56.8%). Addition silicone was the most commonly used final impression material (54.8%), while custom trays were the most preferred tray type (39.2%). Knowledge of the difference between single- and double-cord gingival retraction techniques was reported by 63.0% of respondents, although only 39.6% routinely used retraction cord. Most participants agreed that newer digital impression techniques were more effective than traditional methods (85.2%), and 61.4% reported that they had not been taught digital impression techniques but wished to learn them.