Hassan Ziada

Dr. Hassan Ziada

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

32Years (1995-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
11 July 2007 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
EAE. M. Allen
E. M. Allen
HZHassan Ziada
Hassan Ziada
DOD. O’hAlloran
D. O’hAlloran
VCV. Clerehugh
V. Clerehugh
PAP. F. Allen
P. F. Allen

1 June 2016 in Journal of Endodontics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WEWail M. Elzaki
Wail M. Elzaki
Neamat Hassan Abubakr HassanNeamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
Neamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
HZHassan Ziada
Hassan Ziada
YIYahia E. Ibrahim
Yahia E. Ibrahim

22 October 2020 in International Dental Journal
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
OKOmer Osman Kheir
Omer Osman Kheir
HZHassan Ziada
Hassan Ziada
Neamat Hassan Abubakr HassanNeamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
Neamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
MManar Abdel-Rahman
Manar Abdel-Rahman
SFSahar Mohamed Fadl
Sahar Mohamed Fadl
YIYahia Eltayib Ibrahim
Yahia Eltayib Ibrahim


19 February 2019 in International Journal of Implant Dentistry
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MOMotaz S. Osman
Motaz S. Osman
HZHassan Ziada
Hassan Ziada
Neamat Hassan Abubakr HassanNeamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
Neamat Hassan Abubakr Hassan
ASAhmed M. Suliman
Ahmed M. Suliman
The outcome of the evaluation of impression techniques accuracy may improve the selection criteria for an ideal technique. The aim was to evaluate the accuracy of the open and closed tray techniques for implant impressions, in a partially edentulous maxilla, replaced with a three-unit fixed partial denture, as well as to assess the effect of implants parallelism on accuracy. This is an experimental in vitro study to evaluate impressions accuracy of a simulated area restored with an implant retained FPD, using the open and closed tray implant impression techniques. The effect of implant position angulation, parallelism, and implant systems (Straumann, SIC Invent, Osstem) was also evaluated. Three custom-made acrylic resin test models were prepared with two parallel and two non-parallel implants, on either side of a maxillary arch. One hundred and ninety-two impressions were made using monophase VPS impression material. Their master casts were obtained and evaluated for the horizontal and vertical discrepancy. The casts were scanned using a model scanner. The distances between the two reference points were measured. The Straumann and SIC Invent implants showed no statistically significant differences (Mann-Whitney U test), regarding accuracy for both the open and closed tray impression techniques (P = 0.667 and P = 0.472). There were no significant differences for the parallel and non-parallel implants (P = 0.323 and P = 0.814), respectively, while the Osstem system showed statistically significant differences for both the open and closed tray impression techniques (P = 0.035) and between the parallel and non-parallel implants (P = 0.045). For the vertical discrepancies, significant differences were detected (chi-square test) between the open and closed tray impression techniques (P = 0.037). Within the limitations of this study, there were generally no significant differences between open and closed, although better results were obtained for the open tray techniques. On the use of the non-parallel implants, the open tray technique provided a better result than the closed tray technique.

13 May 2009 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
CLC. D. Lynch
C. D. Lynch
HZHassan Ziada
Hassan Ziada
LBL. A. Buckley
L. A. Buckley
VOV. R. O’sUllivan
V. R. O’sUllivan
TAT. Aherne
T. Aherne
SAS. Aherne
S. Aherne