Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 24, 2026
Accuracy in Dental Medicine, A New Way to Measure Trueness and Precision
Published on: April 29, 2014
Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by dental students: instructional
A M Marti1, B T Harris2, M J Metz3
1Department of Oral Biology, University of Louisville School of Dentistry, Louisville, KY, USA.
Introduction:
With increasing use of digital scanning with restorative procedures in the dental office, it becomes necessary that educational institutions adopt instructional methodology for introducing this technology together with conventional impression techniques.
Objective:
To compare the time differences between instructing dental students on digital scanning (DS) (LAVA C.O.S. digital impression system) and a conventional impression technique (CI) (polyvinyl siloxane), and to compare students' attitudes and beliefs towards both techniques.
Materials And Methods:
Volunteer sophomore dental students (n = 25) with no prior experience in clinical impressions were recruited and IRB consent obtained. Participants responded to a pre-and post-exposure questionnaire. Participants were instructed on the use of both DS and CI for a single tooth full coverage crown restoration using a consecutive sequence of video lecture, investigator-led demonstration and independent impression exercise. The time necessary for each step (minutes) was recorded. Statistical significance was calculated using dependent t-tests (time measurements) and 2-sample Mann-Whitney (questionnaire responses).
Results:
The time spent teaching students was greater for DS than CI for video lecture (15.95 and 10.07 min, P = 0.0000), demonstration time (9.06 and 4.70 min, P = 0.0000) and impression time (18.17 and 8.59 min, P = 0.0000). Prior to the instruction and practice, students considered themselves more familiar with CI (3.96) than DS (1.96) (P = 0.0000). After the instruction and practice, participants reported CI technique proved significantly easier than expected (pre-instruction: 3.52 and post-instruction: 4.08, P = 0.002). However, overall participants' perception of ease of use for DS was not influenced by this instruction and practice experience (pre-instruction: 3.84 and post-instruction: 3.56, P = 0.106). Despite the results, 96% of participants expressed an expectation that DS will become their predominant impression technique during their careers.
Conclusions:
Dental students with no clinical experience have high expectations for digital scanning, and despite their initial difficulty, expect it to become their primary impression technique during their professional futures. The instructional time necessary for introducing DS into the curriculum is significantly greater than CI in both classroom (lecture) and clinical simulation settings (investigator-led demonstration).
