Publication Type:

Journal Article

Source:

Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, Volume 13, Issue 4, p.ZE01-ZE06 (2019)

URL:

https://www.jcdr.net/articles/PDF/12756/38494_CE[Ra1]_F(SHU)_PF1(AB_KM)_PFA(KM_AC)_PB(AB_SL)_PN(SL).pdf

Keywords:

accuracy, Operator preference, Optical impression, Patient preference

Abstract:

Introduction: Accuracy of definitive impressions determines
the quality of final prosthesis to a great extent. In conventional
impression, elastic impression materials are used to replicate
the anatomy and prosthesis is fabricated indirectly. Digital
impression on the other hand gains popularity due to the
advantages like 3D previsualisation, cost effectiveness and
decreased time consumption.
Aim: To review the existing reports, to bring forth the
comprehensive overview on the comparative superiority
of digital impression technique based on accuracy, patient
acceptance, operators preference and time effectiveness when
compared to conventional technique.
Materials and Methods: Search strategy for this review
was based on Population, Intervention, Comparison, and
Outcome(PICO) framework. An electronic search of articles
published from 1980 to 2017 in PubMed, Medline and Cochrane
via Ovid, along with additional hand searches were done.
Data screening and extraction was performed in covidence
systematic reviews of tware. Clinical and preclinical studies and
randomised controlled trials which compared optical impression
with conventional impressions based on accuracy, patient
outcome and operator outcome were included in the study.
Results: A total of 36 articles that complied fully with the
inclusion criteria were evaluated. Among the 24 studies
which compared digital and conventional impressions based
on accuracy, 16 articles reported that digital impressions are
superior to conventional impressions; however no statistical
significance was mentioned. Based on patient preference, four
articles concluded digital impression as the preferred choice.
Eight articles assessed the operator preference and the outcome
was in favour of digital impressions.
Conclusion: This review has concisely summarised that digital
impressions are superior to conventional impressions, without
any statistically significant difference, based on assessment of
accuracy, patient preference and operator preference.

Cite this Research Publication

S. K. Chandran, Dr. Jaini J. L., Babu, A. Serene, Anil Mathew, and Keepanasseril, A., “Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in Dentistry: A Systematic Review”, Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. ZE01-ZE06, 2019.