Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 30, 2025
09:10
Digital Hybrid Model Preparation for Virtual Planning of Reconstructive Dentoalveolar Surgical Procedures
Published on: August 5, 2021
1.8K
Digital versus conventional prosthetic workflow for dental students providing implant-supported single crowns:
Chahak Seth1, Annika Bawa2, Klaus Gotfredsen3
1Research scholar student, Oral Rehabilitation Section, Department of Odontology, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
The Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry
|May 13, 2023
Summary
Patients and dental students overwhelmingly preferred digital scanning over conventional impressions for implant-supported single crowns. This digital approach improved patient comfort and oral health-related quality of life without compromising restoration quality.
Area of Science:
- Dental Technology
- Prosthodontics
- Digital Dentistry
Background:
- Digital scanning is increasingly adopted for dental impressions, often cited for patient comfort and accuracy.
- However, robust clinical evidence supporting these advantages over conventional impression techniques remains limited.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare patient and dental student perceptions of digital scanning versus conventional impressions for implant-supported single crowns (ISSCs).
- To evaluate and compare the quality and patient-reported outcomes of definitive restorations produced by both techniques.
Main Methods:
- A randomized crossover study involving 40 participants requiring ISSCs.
- Participants underwent both conventional impression and digital scanning procedures.
- Patient and student preferences were recorded; patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the OHIP-14 questionnaire, and restoration quality was evaluated using the Copenhagen Index Score (CIS).
Main Results:
- A significant majority of participants (80%) and students (65%) preferred digital scanning.
- Patients reported significantly less anxiety, shortness of breath, and overall discomfort with digital scanning compared to conventional impressions.
- No significant differences were found in the technical or esthetic quality of restorations (CIS) or in oral health-related quality of life (OHIP-14 scores) between the two methods.
Conclusions:
- Digital intraoral scanning offers significantly superior patient and provider perceptions compared to conventional impression techniques for ISSCs.
- Both digital and conventional methods yield comparable restoration quality and patient-reported oral health outcomes.
