The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12903-015-0140-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
HRP carried out the survey and participated in training the subjects. JMP conceived the study and participated in the design of the study. YSC participated in coordinating the study and helped to draft the manuscript. KNL helped to draft and revise the manuscript. MK conceived and designed the study, helped to draft and revise the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Despite the rapid development of digital dentistry, the use of digital intraoral scanners remains limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in views on intraoral scanners among dental hygienists after training.
Thirty-four dental hygienists with >3 years of clinical experience participated and were divided into 2 groups : iTero and Trios groups. Participants of each group practiced the usage of both intraoral scanners, for total 12 times over 4 sessions, Questionnaires were given to participants at two different times; prior to and after the completion of the training sessions. The parameters of questionnaires included on difficulty of use, patient discomfort, awareness, preference, and clinical usefulness of intraoral scanners and comparison of two types of scanners.
Upon the completion of the training, both iTero and Trios groups gave positive feedback on anticipated accuracy, efficiency, and clinical usefulness. More participants of the iTero group responded that the level of difficulty of use and patient discomfort was greater than Trios. Both groups preferred Trios for its clinical usefulness.
The perceptions of dental hygienists on usage of intraoral scanner and digital impression improved positively with the training. The participants favored Trios over iTero in terms of difficulty of use , patient comfort, and clinical usefulness. This study showed that appropriate training could change the views on the efficiency of intraoral scanners positively among dental hygienists.
Additional file 1: Questionnaire. (PDF 300 kb)12903_2015_140_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
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. PubMed
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.
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. PubMed
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.
Choi HS, Kim SH. The Application of CAD/CAM in Dentistry. J Kor Dent Assoc. 2012;50:110–7.
Kugel G. Impression-taking: conventional methods remain steadfast as digital technology progresses. Compend Contin Educ Dent. 2014;35(3):202–3. PubMed
- Changes in views on digital intraoral scanners among dental hygienists after training in digital impression taking
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet Zahnmedizin
Mail Icon II