Changes in views on digital intraoral scanners among dental hygienists after training in digital impression taking

BMC Oral Health

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Park, Hye Ran ^a   Park, Ji Man ^b   Chun, Youn Sic ^c   Lee, Kkot Nim ^a   Kim, Minji ^c  

^a Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University   (South Korea)

^c Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Digital intraoral scanner; Perception of digital impression; Training of intraoral scanner

Indexed keywords

AWARENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DENTAL ASSISTANT; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; PATIENT COMFORT; PERCEPTION; POSITIVE FEEDBACK; QUESTIONNAIRE; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL HYGIENIST; DENTAL IMPRESSION; DENTAL PROCEDURE; IMAGE PROCESSING;

COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; DENTAL HYGIENISTS; DENTAL IMPRESSION TECHNIQUE; DENTAL MODELS; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 84949032841     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726831     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12903-015-0140-5     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2014;112(6):1461-71.
2. Ender A, Mehl A. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int J Comput Dent. 2013;16(1):11-21.
3. Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim MA, Kim MJ. A comparison on the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by two different digital intraoral scanners: Effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2015, In press.
4. Patzelt SB, Emmanouilidi A, Stampf S, Strub JR, Att W. Accuracy of full-arch scans using intraoral scanners. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(6):1687-94.
5. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI. A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod. 2008;35(3):191-201.
6. Lee H, Ercoli C, Funkenbusch PD, Feng C. Effect of subgingival depth of implant placement on the dimensional accuracy of the implant impression: an in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;99(2):107-13.
7. Walker MP, Ries D, Borello B. Implant cast accuracy as a function of impression techniques and impression material viscosity. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2008;23:669-74.
8. Lee H, So JS, Hochstedler JL, Ercoli C. The accuracy of implant impressions: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2008;100(4):285-91.
9. Wee AG. Comparison of impression materials for direct multi-implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(3):323-31.
10. Brosky ME, Pesun IJ, Lowder PD, Delong R, Hodges JS. Laser digitization of casts to determine the effect of tray selection and cast formation technique on accuracy. J Prosthet Dent. 2002;87(2):204-9.
11. Burns J, Palmer R, Howe L, Wilson R. Accuracy of open tray implant impressions: an in vitro comparison of stock versus custom trays. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;89(3):250-5.
12. Ceyhan JA, Johnson GH, Lepe X. The effect of tray selection, viscosity of impression material, and sequence of pour on the accuracy of dies made from dual-arch impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2003;90(2):143-9.
13. Vigolo P, Fonzi F, Majzoub Z, Cordioli G. An evaluation of impression techniques for multiple internal connection implant prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2004;92(5):470-6.
14. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc. 2009;140(10):1301-4.
15. Yuzbasioglu E, Kurt H, Turunc R, Bilir H. Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients' perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes. BMC Oral Health. 2014;14:10-6.
16. Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA. Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;25(7):1-6.
17. Herbst D, Nel JC, Driessen CH, Becker PJ. Evaluation of impression accuracy for osseointegrated implant supported superstructures. J Prosthet Dent. 2000;83(5):555-61.
18. Choi HS, Kim SH. The Application of CAD/CAM in Dentistry. J Kor Dent Assoc. 2012;50:110-7.
19. Miyazaki T, Hotta Y, Kunii J, Kuriyama S, Tamaki Y. A review of dental CAD/CAM: current status and future perspectives from 20 years of experience. Dent Mater J. 2009;28(1):44-56.
20. Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(1):111-5.
21. Lee SJ, Macarthur RX, Gallucci GO. An evaluation of student and clinician perception of digital and conventional implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;110(5):420-3.
22. Kugel G. Impression-taking: conventional methods remain steadfast as digital technology progresses. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2014;35(3):202-3.