Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 12, 2025
Dynamic Navigation for Dental Implant Placement
Published on: September 13, 2022
Duration, deviation and operator's perception of static computer assisted implant placements by inexperienced
1Melbourne Dental School, Melbourne University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Introduction:
This study measured the duration, deviation and operator's perception of implant placement by fully guided (FG), pilot-guided (PG) and freehand (FH) protocols by postgraduate students with minimal implant experience.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty postgraduate students participated in the study. Half of them placed single anterior (S-Ant) and single posterior (S-Post) implants, and the other half placed anterior (B-Ant) and posterior (B-Post) implants in a wide edentulous area. The PG placement involved surgical guides that only controlled pilot drilling, whilst the FG placement controlled all the drilling steps and implant placement. The duration of implant placement and the operator's perception (ease of drilling, ease of implant placement and operator's preference) were measured. The deviations of placed implants were quantified by measuring the trueness and angulation deviations in relation to the planned implants.
Results:
The PG placement was the quickest for inserting implants, followed by FG and FH placements, respectively (p < .05). The location of the implant had influenced the duration of implant placement only for the PG placement. In relation to ease of drilling, ease of implant placement and operator's preference, there was no significant difference amongst the different placement protocols or implant locations. The FG placement was associated with least deviations, followed by PG and FH placements, respectively (p < .05).
Conclusions:
In the hands of postgraduate students with minimal implant experience, FG and PG placements reduced the implant placement duration in comparison with FH placement. The FG placement was consistently more accurate followed by PG placement.
