Digital versus conventional impression method in children: Comfort, preference and time

Yılmaz, Hakan; Aydın, Makbule

doi:10.1111/ipd.12566

Cited by 47 publications

(92 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Compared with the conventional methods, acquiring a digital impression using an intraoral scanner has the advantages of easy repetition, direct model visualization, improved time efficiency, and chairside data acquisition for CAD/CAM prosthetics. Patients also show a strong preference for digital impression acquisition over the conventional methodology in the clinical setting [7]. The digital technique also plays a significant role in treatment planning via simulation in the aesthetic area.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The properties of underlying substrates influence the quality of an intraoral scan, but few studies have compared the outcomes using common restorative materials. In this study, we aimed to compare the accuracy of digital and conventional impressions recorded for four different dental materials as the substrates. Experimental crowns were produced with a metallic surface (gold or cobalt-chromium alloy (Co-Cr)) or without a metallic surface (zirconia or PMMA (polymethyl methacrylate)). A conventional impression was made in the conventional group (CON group), and gypsum models were subsequently scanned with a tabletop scanner. An intraoral scanner was used to scan the crowns either after applying a powder spray to reduce the surface reflectivity (IOS-P group) or without the powder spray (IOS group). The scans were assessed in three dimensions for precision and trueness. The accuracy did not differ between the CON and IOS groups for the non-metallic crowns. However, it was statistically different for the Co-Cr metallic crown, reducing trueness observed between groups as CON > IOS > IOS-P. The study evidences the differences in outer surface accuracy observed with a change in the substrate material to be imaged using an oral scanner and with the impression method. These findings suggest that the restoration material present in the oral cavity should be considered when selecting an impression-taking method.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding comfort and preference over different methods, a recent study has shown that digital molding was considered more comfortable compared to the conventional alginate method and was considered the preferred method. [10] This study concluded that there was no statistically significant difference between the conventional molding and digital molding, concerning the time required for the technique. was also done in the present work, but the volunteers were adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…[6,[14][15][16][17] Thus, direct intraoral scanning is an important tool for obtaining study models and analysis of dental measurements for children and young patients, since satisfaction with this method has already been shown to be higher in adults [18] and children. [10] However, more studies are still needed, especially clinical ones, since most studies in the literature analyze the accuracy of this method in resin models [13,17] so that it can be used in the same way as models obtained via conventional molding without harming future clinical conducts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Study of Concordance of Digital Models, Plaster Models, and 3D Printed Filament Models with Clinical Measurements in Children

Rosin¹,

Daltoé²,

Pucinelli³

et al. 2020

J Pediatr Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate, in pediatric patients, the concordance of intraoral scanner for dental measurements, comparing the measurements obtained clinically with digital models, 3D printed filament models, and conventional plaster models. Materials and Methods: For this study, 31 patients with mixed dentition were selected, with at least the upper central incisors and upper first permanent molars erupted. The dental size measurement obtained with 3Shape Trios Scanner was compared with that obtained clinically with the aid of a digital caliper, as well as the measurements made with plaster models and filament printed models. For data analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was performed and the agreement was categorized according to it. The Bland–Altman analysis was also applied to the data to graphically display the concordance. Results: There was no difference in agreement between measurements made in plaster and filament models compared to the reference method, and for measurements in the digital model, the agreement was low or zero in the molar region. Conclusion: According to the present study, we can conclude that both plaster and filament models presented values that are faithful to those obtained clinically and that the evaluated region affected the agreement with the reference method.

show abstract

“…However, when the operators were evaluated separately, there were significant differences. Unlike this study, similar studies that evaluated impression time 5,8,9,11,32 had operators experienced either in conventional or digital techniques. Furthermore, previous studies used complete impression technique, 6,8,9,32 regional impression technique for single implant 3,5,8 or different impression techniques (closed‐mouth technique) 31 comparing conventional impressions and digital scans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Intraoral scanners (IOS) are increasingly used in dentistry for digital scans which avoid the challenges in clinical and laboratory steps of conventional techniques and improve patient comfort. Also, the scans and bite registrations can be digitally stored 2–12 . However, higher cost of the IOS and software and the learning curve are disadvantages of digital scanning, 10,13 and conventional impressions are still more commonly used 10,14–16 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Impression Technique and Operator Experience on Impression Time and Operator‐Reported Outcomes

Yılmaz

Eğlenen

Çakmak

et al. 2021

Journal of Prosthodontics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the effect of impression technique (conventional preliminary alginate and digital scan) and operator experience in impression making (experienced in digital and conventional, experienced in conventional and inexperienced in digital, and inexperienced in conventional and digital) on impression time, satisfaction and stress levels, and the preference of the operators. Material and Methods One patient was assigned for each of the 60 operators, who were experienced in impression techniques at different levels (Group 1: experienced in conventional and digital, Group 2: experienced in conventional and inexperienced in digital, Group 3: inexperienced in conventional and digital). They made conventional impressions (irreversible hydrocolloid) and digital scans (Trios 3) from the same patient. The impression times were recorded at each step (patient registration, maxillary arch, mandibular arch, and bite registration) and in total. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used for the operator satisfaction for applicability, comfort, and hygiene; the State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory form (STAI‐TX1) was used for stress, and a questionnaire was completed to measure the operator's impression preference. The data were analyzed with a 2‐way ANOVA and Chi‐square test (α = 0.05). Results A significant interaction was found between the operator experience in impression making and the impression technique on time for maxillary and mandibular arch impressions and total time (p ≤ 0.002). Operator experience and impression technique interaction had a significant effect on comfort and average VAS scores (p ≤ 0.016). Whereas, no significant effect of this interaction was found on stress (p ≥ 0.195). Operator experience in impression making had a significant effect on applicability (p < 0.001), and the impression technique had a significant effect on hygiene VAS scores (p < 0.001). Operators in Group 1 and Group 3 preferred the digital scans, however, operators in Group 2 had no preference (p = 0.022). Conclusion Operator experience in impression making and impression technique had varying effects on clinician's impression time, comfort, applicability, hygiene, and preference. Operators needed less time for the impressions they were experienced with. Operator stress level was not affected by the operator experience in impression making and the impression technique. Dental students and operators experienced in both techniques were satisfied with the digital scans and they preferred digital scans. Operators experienced with conventional impressions were satisfied with conventional impressions but didn't have a preference for the impression type.

show abstract

Digital versus conventional impression method in children: Comfort, preference and time

Cited by 47 publications

References 27 publications

A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study

A Comparison of Accuracy of Different Dental Restorative Materials between Intraoral Scanning and Conventional Impression-Taking: An In Vitro Study

Comparative Study of Concordance of Digital Models, Plaster Models, and 3D Printed Filament Models with Clinical Measurements in Children

Effect of Impression Technique and Operator Experience on Impression Time and Operator‐Reported Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About