Factors Influencing Adoption of New Technologies into Dental Practice

Matthews, David; McNeil, Karen; Brillant, Martha; Tax, Cara L.; Maillet, Peggy J.; McCulloch, Christopher A.; Glogauer, Michael

doi:10.1177/2380084415627129

Cited by 31 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the final model, focus on technologies, as well as the value dentists think they add to their work explained part of the variance. “Focus,” which refers to compatibility with a dentist's professional preferences and mindset, is a determinant of adoption among professionals often found in other studies . Dentists who thought that using technologies adds more value to their work were also likely to use a higher number of technologies, which is in line with studies showing that “perceived usefulness” of technologies influences technology adoption in many sectors .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Other factors not included in our study could contribute to a fuller explanation . Social influence and sociopolitical factors, for example, play a large role here, in the context of dentistry as well as in other health care professions . Furthermore, developments in health care in terms of financing and juridical measures, changes in the workforce and in the size and organization of dental practices, can be expected to impact on technology use as well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, these studies often focused on very specific technologies, whereas in this study the ensemble of digital technologies used was investigated. Among dentists, factors relating to expected improvements to quality of care, expected added value to the practice and to the dentist, expected ease of use, and own skills and resources were found to be related to use of specific technologies. This study adds to previous studies by showing that scores on a large combination of opinion‐related scales differed between dentists with varying levels of technology use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dental practitioners’ adoption of digital technologies has been investigated in several studies, giving valuable insight into dentists’ reasons for adopting specific technologies. Other studies have investigated the extent to which dental practitioners use various technologies, and for which purposes .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This pertains to aspects of work, such as doing technical work or delivering highquality care to patients, that bring motivation, enjoyment and value to dentists' work. 18,[24][25][26] Dental practitioners' adoption of digital technologies has been investigated in several studies, [27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35] giving valuable insight into dentists' reasons for adopting specific technologies. Other studies have investigated the extent to which dental practitioners use various technologies, and for which purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Dentists’ opinions on using digital technologies in dental practice

Zande

Gorter

Bruers

et al. 2017

Comm Dent Oral Epid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Dentists’ opinions on using digital technologies in dental practice

Zande

Gorter

Bruers

et al. 2017

Comm Dent Oral Epid

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A comparison study: The use of digital and conventional impression techniques in dental hygiene education

Naderi,

Patel,

Thompson

2024

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose/objectivesThe study aimed to assess the applicability of digital intraoral scanning in dental hygiene education and compare the quality, efficiency, and ease of use to conventional impression techniques.MethodsTwenty‐eight first‐year dental hygiene students (DH1) at UTHealth Houston School of Dentistry (UTSD) participated in this 2022 study. Each student participated in two 4‐h lab sessions. Students took traditional alginate impressions and digital intraoral scans using Planmeca Romexis on standardized teeth during the first and second sessions. Both techniques were assessed by faculty for quality and efficiency using a standardized rubric. Participants completed a post‐survey providing insight into their perceptions of both techniques and ease of use.ResultsThe study had 100% participation in the lab sessions and survey responses (N = 28). The results showed digital scanning produced a statistically higher quality product than conventional alginate impressions (p = 0.023). The study found no statistical difference in the efficiency between the two methods. The majority of students (82%) agreed that digital intraoral scanning was easy to use (p = 0.001), and 89% agreed they would use digital intraoral scanning in clinical courses to help with patient care (p = 0.03).ConclusionIn this study, dental hygiene students with limited clinical experience learned new technology and used it to produce quality impressions compared to the conventional technique, indicating the value of introducing digital dentistry early in dental hygiene education.

show abstract

Comparison of radiographic imaging quality/accuracy using photostimulable phosphor plates and metal oxide semiconductor receptors

Schwerter‐Medina,

Ríos‐Kremer,

Rosas

et al. 2024

Journal of Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo compare thequality and accuracy of radiographic images obtained by dentistry students from a Chilean university using photostimulable phosphor plates (PSP) and complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) receptors.Materials and methodsAn experimental study was carried out in which 31 dental students used PSP and CMOS receptors to acquire radiographic images with the aid of a phantom. The time required to generate a radiograph was recorded. Image quality included sharpness/definition and brightness/contrast analysis. Accuracy assessed placement error, angulation errors, and cone cutting. A three‐point scale was used for each variable: 0 = undiagnosable, 1 = acceptable diagnosis with minor errors, and 2 = perfect diagnostic quality.ResultsThe required time to generate a radiograph was faster with PSP than with CMOS (1.43 ± 0.28 min and 1.52 ± 0.61 min, respectively). Image quality analysis revealed that PSP was superior in sharpness/definition and brightness/contrast, whereas no significant differences were observed compared to CMOS (p > 0.05). Moreover, no differences were noticed in technique accuracy regarding angulation errors and cone cutting (p > 0.05). However, placement errors with PSP had significantly higher average scores than CMOS (1.11 ± 0.77 and 0.67 ± 0.85, respectively; p < 0.01).ConclusionDental students would benefit from being trained on both receptors to be able to adapt to a diversified workplace. Radiographic images obtained by dentistry students demonstrate that PSP and CMOS exhibit similar parameters regarding quality and accuracy, except in placement where PSP demonstrates greater accuracy.

show abstract

Factors Influencing Adoption of New Technologies into Dental Practice

Abstract: the decision to adopt new technologies. However, even among "early adopters," most were reluctant to use new tests or tools unless they perceived a benefit to their patients or practice.

Cited by 31 publications

References 25 publications

Dentists’ opinions on using digital technologies in dental practice

Dentists’ opinions on using digital technologies in dental practice

A comparison study: The use of digital and conventional impression techniques in dental hygiene education

Comparison of radiographic imaging quality/accuracy using photostimulable phosphor plates and metal oxide semiconductor receptors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About