Comparative Evaluation of the Accuracy, Precision, and Clinical Efficiency of Intraoral Digital Scanners Versus Conventional Elastomeric Impression Techniques
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64149/Keywords:
Digital impressions, Conventional impressions, Intraoral scanner, Accuracy, Patient comfort, Clinical efficiencyAbstract
Background: Accurate dental impressions are essential for the fabrication of restorations and orthodontic appliances. Conventional elastomeric impression materials, such as polyvinyl siloxane (PVS), have been widely used but are often associated with patient discomfort, material distortion, and time-consuming procedures. Intraoral digital scanners have emerged as an alternative, offering potential advantages in accuracy, efficiency, and patient comfort. However, comparative clinical evidence is still limited.
Aim: To compare the accuracy, precision, clinical efficiency, and patient comfort of intraoral digital scanning versus conventional elastomeric impression techniques.
Materials and Methods: A comparative clinical study was conducted on 30 patients requiring diagnostic impressions. Conventional impressions were made using PVS material and poured in Type IV dental stone. Digital impressions were obtained using an intraoral scanner, and STL files were analyzed using three-dimensional evaluation software. Accuracy was assessed in terms of trueness and precision using linear measurements and superimposition analysis. Clinical efficiency was measured by recording chairside time for each technique. Patient comfort and preference were assessed using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) questionnaire. Data were analyzed using SPSS software. Paired and independent t-tests were used for continuous variables, and the Chi-square test was used for categorical variables. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results (Expected): Intraoral digital scanners are expected to demonstrate superior accuracy and precision compared to conventional impressions. Chairside time is anticipated to be significantly shorter for digital impressions. Patients are expected to report higher comfort and preference for digital scanning over conventional methods.
Conclusion: Within the limitations of the study, intraoral digital scanning is likely to be a reliable, accurate, and patient-friendly alternative to conventional elastomeric impressions, supporting the integration of digital workflows in contemporary dental practice
