A systematic review of clinical trials on digital impression of prepared teeth

  • M. Pecciarini | farma@ariesdue.it Università degli Studi di Siena, Italy.
  • A. Biagioni Department of Biomedical Technologies, University of Siena, Siena, Italy, Italy.
  • M. Ferrari Department of Biomedical Technologies, University of Siena, Siena, Italy, Italy.

Abstract

Aim The purpose of this review is to verify, in the existing literature, how many clinical studies have been conducted by performing intraoral digital impressions on prepared teeth. 

Materials and methods An electronic search was performed through Pubmed database, and the keywords were: “digital impression”, “intraoral digital impression”, “NOT implant”. The selection process started with a primary screening based on titles and abstracts. Afterward, full-texts were carefully read. Only studies in accordance with the inclusion criteria were selected.

Results Only 16 studies dealing with the required criteria were included. Most of the studies evaluated marginal fit, impression time, dentists’ and patients’ evaluation of impressions and clinical outcome of CAD/CAM (Computer-aided design/Computer- aided manufacturing) fabricated single crown and multiple-fixed dental prosthesis using intraoral digital impression and the conventional impression.

Conclusion In the literature there are only few in vivo clinical studies regarding digital intraoral impressions on prepared teeth.

More studies about how the experience of the operator affects the accuracy of digital impression, and about the learning curve are needed, in order to provide clinical evidence on the practical use of this technology.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Published
2019-05-20
Section
Articles
Statistics
Abstract views: 62

pdf: 2
Share it
Received 2018-07-24
Published 2019-05-20

PlumX Metrics

PlumX Metrics provide insights into the ways people interact with individual pieces of research output (articles, conference proceedings, book chapters, and many more) in the online environment. Examples include, when research is mentioned in the news or is tweeted about. Collectively known as PlumX Metrics, these metrics are divided into five categories to help make sense of the huge amounts of data involved and to enable analysis by comparing like with like.

How to Cite
Pecciarini, M., Biagioni, A., & Ferrari, M. (2019). A systematic review of clinical trials on digital impression of prepared teeth. Journal of Osseointegration, 11(2), 92-97. https://doi.org/10.23805/JO.2019.11.02.03