An Updated Comparison of Current Impression Techniques Regarding Time, Comfort, Anxiety, and Preference: A Randomized Crossover Trial

Objective: To compare digital and conventional impressions in terms of impression time, and comfort, anxiety, and preference of the patients.Methods: Digital scans (Trios 3 Cart) and conventional impressions (irreversible hydrocolloid material, hand-mixed) were randomly performed on 39 patients by a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hakan Yılmaz (Author), Fatma Aslı Konca (Author), Merve Nur Aydın (Author)
Format: Book
Published: Galenos Yayinevi, 2021-12-01T00:00:00Z.
Subjects:
Online Access:Connect to this object online.
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000 am a22000003u 4500
001 doaj_7d3896b50e1d4f289b35320b2c28dbe4
042 |a dc 
100 1 0 |a Hakan Yılmaz  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Fatma Aslı Konca  |e author 
700 1 0 |a Merve Nur Aydın  |e author 
245 0 0 |a An Updated Comparison of Current Impression Techniques Regarding Time, Comfort, Anxiety, and Preference: A Randomized Crossover Trial 
260 |b Galenos Yayinevi,   |c 2021-12-01T00:00:00Z. 
500 |a 2528-9659 
500 |a 2148-9505 
500 |a 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2021.21025 
520 |a Objective: To compare digital and conventional impressions in terms of impression time, and comfort, anxiety, and preference of the patients.Methods: Digital scans (Trios 3 Cart) and conventional impressions (irreversible hydrocolloid material, hand-mixed) were randomly performed on 39 patients by a single experienced operator at 14-21-day intervals (crossover design). The impression time, comfort score with the visual analog scale, anxiety level with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and preference with a questionnaire, were recorded. The 2 techniques were compared with the independent t-test in terms of time, comfort, and anxiety. Patient-operator assessment and time-comfort relationship were analyzed using Pearson's correlation test.Results: No statistical difference was found between the 2 impression techniques in terms of time (P = .231). Both the operators' and patients' comfort scores showed that the digital technique was found to be more comfortable (P < .001). There was no statistical difference between the 2 techniques with regard to anxiety (P = .668). The patients' and operators' comfort scores showed a strong correlation (P < .001), but no correlation was found between comfort and time (P > .05).Conclusion: Digital scanning and conventional dental impression were similar in terms of impression time and anxiety of patients. However, patients were more satisfied with the digital technique, and preferred it. 
546 |a EN 
690 |a intraoral scanner 
690 |a dental impression 
690 |a patient comfort 
690 |a dental anxiety 
690 |a clinical efficiency 
690 |a Dentistry 
690 |a RK1-715 
655 7 |a article  |2 local 
786 0 |n Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, Vol 34, Iss 4, Pp 227-233 (2021) 
787 0 |n  http://www.turkjorthod.org/archives/archive-detail/article-preview/an-updated-comparison-of-current-mpression-techniq/53307  
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2528-9659 
787 0 |n https://doaj.org/toc/2148-9505 
856 4 1 |u https://doaj.org/article/7d3896b50e1d4f289b35320b2c28dbe4  |z Connect to this object online.