Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May;25(2):232-237.
doi: 10.1111/eje.12596. Epub 2020 Sep 10.

The dentist will scan you now: The next generation of digital-savvy graduates

Affiliations

The dentist will scan you now: The next generation of digital-savvy graduates

Clarine Cheah et al. Eur J Dent Educ. 2021 May.

Abstract

Introduction: Undergraduate dental curriculum consisting of digital tools is essential in today's era of modern dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate final-year undergraduate dental students' perception of using intraoral scanners and the feasibility of increasing exposure to intraoral scanners in their undergraduate programme.

Materials and methods: Forty students volunteered to complete one maxillary conventional and optical impression (TRIOS 3, 3Shape A/S). Questionnaires were used to assess their familiarity, perceived confidence levels, difficulties and user-friendliness of each technique using a visual analogue scale prior to and after experiencing each impression technique.

Results: Students felt more familiar with conventional (C) than digital (D) impressions (P = .00). Their pre-confidence level was also higher with the conventional method (C: 80.9 ± 15.5; D: 39.6 ± 25.5); however, the post-confidence level significantly increased for the digital impression technique (P = .00). Participants perceived conventional technique to be easier (P = .02) and faster than optical impressions (P = .03). User-friendliness of the intraoral scanner scored moderate (67.7 ± 22.9). The difference in the mean total working time was not significant (P = .05). Forty per cent of participants indicated that they preferred using the digital impression technique.

Conclusions: Although final-year undergraduate students still perceived the conventional impression technique to be easier and faster than digital scanning, there was a significant increase in the level of confidence by this cohort after only one occasion of clinical optical impressions. Undergraduate dental students are ready to uptake new technology, and it should be strongly considered to incorporate more digital scanning during their training.

Keywords: digital impression; intraoral scan; operator preference; prosthodontics; time efficiency.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

REFERENCES

    1. Mormann WH. The evolution of the CEREC system. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(Suppl):7S-13S.
    1. Ting-Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral digital impression technique: a review. J Prosthodont. 2015;24:313-321.
    1. 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. 2014;25:1113-1118.
    1. Gjelvold B, Chrcanovic BR, Korduner EK, Collin-Bagewitz I, Kisch J. Intraoral digital impression technique compared to conventional impression technique. A randomized clinical trial. J Prosthodont. 2016;25:282-287.
    1. 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.

LinkOut - more resources