Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Oral Health
Published in: BMC Oral Health 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Research

Comparison of the learning curve of intraoral scanning with two different intraoral scanners based on scanning time

Authors: Ivett Róth, Péter Hermann, Viktória Vitai, Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács, Zoltán Géczi, Judit Borbély

Published in: BMC Oral Health | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The appearance of intraoral scanners (IOSs) in dental offices was an important milestones for the digital innovations in dentistry. Knowing the learning curve for intraoral scanning is crucial, because it can serve as a guideline for clinicians before buying a new IOS. The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine the learning curve required by dental students for intraoral scanning with the 3Shape Trios 4 IOS and the CEREC Primescan IOS, based on scanning time.

Methods

A total of 20 dental students with no previous experience in intraoral scanning participated in the present study. 10 students scanned with Trios 4® IOS (TRI) and 10 students took digital impressions with Primescan® IOS (CER). Every student created 15 digital impressions from patients. Prior to taking the impressions, theoretical and practical education was provided. The total scanning time included the upper and lower arches as well as bite registration, for which average values were calculated. Statistical analysis was performed using the Stata package with a mixed-effects generalized least squares regression models.

Results

The average total scanning times were the following: TRI – 205 s for the 1st impression, 133.6 s for the 15th, CER – 289.8 s for the 1st impression, 147 s for the 15th. The model-based estimate of the difference between the two in case of TRI was 57.5 s, and in CER was 144.2 s which is a highly significant improvement in both cases (P < 0.0001). The slope of the scanning time vs. learning phase curve gradually approached flatness, and maintained a plateau: TRI – from the 11th measurement and CER – from the 14th measurement onward.

Conclusions

Given the limitations of the present study, we found difference between the learning curve of scanner types which are operate various principle of imaging. In case of the TRI fewer digital impressions (11 repeating) were sufficient to reach the average scanning time of an experienced user than using CER (14 repeating).

Trial registration

The permission for this study was given by the University Ethics Committee of Semmelweis University (SE RKEB number: 184/2022).
Literature
1.
Beuer F, Schweiger J, Edelhoff D. Digital dentistry: an overview of recent developments for CAD/CAM generated restorations. Br Dent J. 2008;204(9):505–11.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Pradíes G, Zarauz C, Valverde A, Ferreiroa A, Martínez-Rus F. Clinical evaluation comparing the fit of all-ceramic crowns obtained from silicone and digital intraoral impressions based on wavefront sampling technology. J Dent. 2015;43(2):201–8.PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Persson M, Andersson M, Bergman B. The accuracy of a high-precision digitizer for CAD/CAM of crowns. J Prosthet Dent. 1995;74(3):223–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zimmermann M, Mörmann AMWH. Reich. Intraoral scanning systems – a current overview. Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(2):101–29.PubMed
6.
Richert R, Goujat A, Venet L, Viguie G, Viennot S, Robinson P, et al. Intraoral scanner Technologies: a review to make a successful impression. J Healthc Eng. 2017;2017:8427595.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
8.
Burhardt L, Livas C, Kerdijk W, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Treatment comfort, time perception, and preference for conventional and digital impression techniques: a comparative study in young patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016;150(2):261–7.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Park HR, Park JM, Chun YS, Lee KN, Kim M. Changes in views on digital intraoral scanners among dental hygienists after training in digital impression taking. BMC Oral Health. 2015;15(1):151.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
10.
Schepke U, Meijer HJ, Kerdijk W, Cune MS. Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: operating time and patient preference. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(3):403–6e1.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Christopoulou I, Kaklamanos EG, Makrygiannakis MA, Bitsanis I, Tsolakis AI. Patient-reported experiences and preferences with intraoral scanners: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2022;44(1):56–65.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Joda T, Brägger U. Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2016;27(12):e185–e9.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Resende CCD, Barbosa TAQ, Moura GF, Tavares LDN, Rizzante FAP, George FM, et al. Influence of operator experience, scanner type, and scan size on 3D scans. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(2):294–9.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Sfondrini MF, Gandini P, Malfatto M, Di Corato F, Trovati F, Scribante A. Computerized casts for Orthodontic purpose using powder-free Intraoral Scanners: accuracy, execution time, and patient feedback. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:4103232.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
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.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
16.
Abdel-Azim T, Rogers K, Elathamna E, Zandinejad A, Metz M, Morton D. Comparison of the marginal fit of lithium disilicate crowns fabricated with CAD/CAM technology by using conventional impressions and two intraoral digital scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2015;114(4):554–9.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Abduo J, Elseyoufi M. Accuracy of Intraoral Scanners: a systematic review of influencing factors. Eur J Prosthodont Restor Dent. 2018;26(3):101–21.PubMed
18.
Ahlholm P, Sipilä K, Vallittu P, Jakonen M, Kotiranta U. Digital Versus Conventional Impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J Prosthodont. 2018;27(1):35–41.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Ammoun R, Suprono MS, Goodacre CJ, Oyoyo U, Carrico CK, Kattadiyil MT. Influence of tooth Preparation Design and scan angulations on the Accuracy of two Intraoral Digital Scanners: an in Vitro Study based on 3-Dimensional comparisons. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(3):201–6.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Chiu A, Chen YW, Hayashi J, Sadr A. Accuracy of CAD/CAM Digital Impressions with Different Intraoral Scanner Parameters. Sens (Basel). 2020;20(4).
21.
Pattamavilai S, Ongthiemsak C. Accuracy of intraoral scanners in different complete arch scan patterns. J Prosthet Dent. 2022.
22.
Schimmel M, Akino N, Srinivasan M, Wittneben JG, Yilmaz B, Abou-Ayash S. Accuracy of intraoral scanning in completely and partially edentulous maxillary and mandibular jaws: an in vitro analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(4):1839–47.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Goracci C, Franchi L, Vichi A, Ferrari M. Accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of intraoral scanners for full-arch impressions: a systematic review of the clinical evidence. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38(4):422–8.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Joda T, Brägger U. Time-efficiency analysis comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: a prospective clinical crossover trial. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2015;30(5):1047–53.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Joda T, Brägger U. Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015;26(12):1430–5.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013;24(1):111–5.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Patzelt SB, Lamprinos C, Stampf S, Att W. The time efficiency of intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparative study. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(6):542–51.PubMedCrossRef
28.
Róth I, Czigola A, Fehér D, Vitai V, Joós-Kovács GL, Hermann P, et al. Digital intraoral scanner devices: a validation study based on common evaluation criteria. BMC Oral Health. 2022;22(1):140.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
29.
Vecsei B, Joós-Kovács G, Borbély J, Hermann P. Comparison of the accuracy of direct and indirect three-dimensional digitizing processes for CAD/CAM systems - an in vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2017;61(2):177–84.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Joda T, Lenherr P, Dedem P, Kovaltschuk I, Bragger U, Zitzmann NU. Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator’s preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017;28(10):1318–23.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Ender A, Zimmermann M, Attin T, Mehl A. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods for obtaining quadrant dental impressions. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20(7):1495–504.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Ender A, Mehl A. Accuracy of complete-arch dental impressions: a new method of measuring trueness and precision. J Prosthet Dent. 2013;109(2):121–8.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Su TS, Sun J. Comparison of repeatability between intraoral digital scanner and extraoral digital scanner: an in-vitro study. J Prosthodont Res. 2015;59(4):236–42.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Chochlidakis KM, Papaspyridakos P, Geminiani A, Chen CJ, Feng IJ, Ercoli C. Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(2):184–. – 90.e12.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Sacher M, Schulz G, Deyhle H, Jäger K, Müller B. Accuracy of commercial intraoral scanners. J Med Imaging (Bellingham). 2021;8(3):035501.PubMed
36.
Imburgia M, Logozzo S, Hauschild U, Veronesi G, Mangano C, Mangano F. Accuracy of four intraoral scanners in oral implantology: A comparative in vitro study. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17.
37.
Di Fiore A, Meneghello R, Graiff L, Savio G, Vigolo P, Monaco C, et al. Full arch digital scanning systems performances for implant-supported fixed dental prostheses: a comparative study of 8 intraoral scanners. J Prosthodont Res. 2019;63(4):396–403.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Osnes CA, Wu JH, Venezia P, Ferrari M, Keeling AJ. Full arch precision of six intraoral scanners in vitro. J Prosthodont Res. 2020;64(1):6–11.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Baghani MT, Shayegh SS, Johnston WM, Shidfar S, Hakimaneh SMR. In vitro evaluation of the accuracy and precision of intraoral and extraoral complete-arch scans. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(5):665–70.PubMedCrossRef
40.
Michelinakis G, Apostolakis D, Kamposiora P, Papavasiliou G, Özcan M. The direct digital workflow in fixed implant prosthodontics: a narrative review. BMC Oral Health. 2021;21(1):37.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Vág J, Renne W, Revell G, Ludlow M, Mennito A, Teich ST, et al. The effect of software updates on the trueness and precision of intraoral scanners. Quintessence Int. 2021;52(7):636–44.PubMed
42.
Haddadi Y, Bahrami G, Isidor F. Effect of Software Version on the Accuracy of an Intraoral scanning device. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(4):375–6.PubMedCrossRef
43.
Pradíes G, Ferreiroa A, Özcan M, Giménez B, Martínez-Rus F. Using stereophotogrammetric technology for obtaining intraoral digital impressions of implants. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014;145(4):338–44.PubMedCrossRef
44.
Siqueira R, Galli M, Chen Z, Mendonça G, Meirelles L, Wang HL, et al. Intraoral scanning reduces procedure time and improves patient comfort in fixed prosthodontics and implant dentistry: a systematic review. Clin Oral Investig. 2021;25(12):6517–31.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
45.
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
46.
Guth JF, Runkel C, Beuer F, Stimmelmayr M, Edelhoff D, Keul C. Accuracy of five intraoral scanners compared to indirect digitalization. Clin Oral Investig. 2017;21(5):1445–55.PubMedCrossRef
47.
Müller P, Ender A, Joda T, Katsoulis J. Impact of digital intraoral scan strategies on the impression accuracy using the TRIOS pod scanner. Quintessence Int. 2016;47(4):343–9.PubMed
48.
Gherlone E, Mandelli F, Cappare P, Pantaleo G, Traini T, Ferrini F. A 3 years retrospective study of survival for zirconia-based single crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions. J Dent. 2014;42(9):1151–5.PubMedCrossRef
49.
Roth I, Czigola A, Joos-Kovacs GL, Dalos M, Hermann P, Borbely J. Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning - an in vivo study. BMC Oral Health. 2020;20(1):287.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Al Hamad KQ. Learning curve of intraoral scanning by prosthodontic residents. J Prosthet Dent. 2020;123(2):277–83.PubMedCrossRef
51.
Kim J, Park JM, Kim M, Heo SJ, Shin IH, Kim M. Comparison of experience curves between two 3-dimensional intraoral scanners. J Prosthet Dent. 2016;116(2):221–30.PubMedCrossRef
52.
Zarauz C, Sailer I, Pitta J, Robles-Medina M, Hussein AA, Pradíes G. Influence of age and scanning system on the learning curve of experienced and novel intraoral scanner operators: a multi-centric clinical trial. J Dent. 2021;115:103860.PubMedCrossRef
53.
Waldecker M, Trebing C, Rues S, Behnisch R, Rammelsberg P, Bömicke W. Effects of Training on the execution of Complete-Arch Scans. Part 1: scanning time. Int J Prosthodont. 2021;34(1):21–6.PubMedCrossRef
54.
Schunk DH. In: Smith P, editor. Learning theories: an educational perspective. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2020. pp. 218–20.
55.
Mörmann W. The evolution of the CEREC system. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939). 2006;137 Suppl:7S-13S.
56.
Santos G, Santos M, Rizkalla A, Madani D, El-Mowafy O. Overview of CEREC CAD/CAM chairside system. Gen Dent. 2013;61:36–40.PubMed
57.
Zaruba M, Mehl A. Chairside systems: a current review. Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(2):123–49.PubMed
58.
Skramstad MJ. Welcome to Cerec Primescan AC. Int J Comput Dent. 2019;22(1):69–78.PubMed
59.
60.
61.
Mai HY, Mai HN, Lee CH, Lee KB, Kim SY, Lee JM, et al. Impact of scanning strategy on the accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scans: a preliminary study on segmental scans and merge methods. J Adv Prosthodont. 2022;14(2):88–95.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
62.
Oh KC, Park JM, Moon HS. Effects of scanning strategy and scanner type on the Accuracy of Intraoral Scans: a New Approach for assessing the Accuracy of Scanned Data. J Prosthodont. 2020;29(6):518–23.PubMedCrossRef
63.
64.
Logozzo S, Zanetti EM, Franceschini G, Kilpelä A, Mäkynen A. Recent advances in dental optics – part I: 3D intraoral scanners for restorative dentistry. Opt Lasers Eng. 2014;54:203–21.CrossRef
65.
Christopoulou I, Kaklamanos EG, Makrygiannakis MA, Bitsanis I, Perlea P, Tsolakis AI. Intraoral Scanners in Orthodontics: A Critical Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(3).
66.
Stanley M, Paz AG, Miguel I, Coachman C. Fully digital workflow, integrating dental scan, smile design and CAD-CAM: case report. BMC Oral Health. 2018;18(1):134.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
67.
Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on active wavefront sampling technology for implants considering operator experience, implant angulation, and depth. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2015;17(Suppl 1):e54–64.PubMedCrossRef
68.
Lecocq G. Digital impression-taking: Fundamentals and benefits in orthodontics. Int Orthod. 2016;14(2):184–94.PubMed
69.
Ting-Shu S, Jian S. Intraoral Digital impression technique: a review. J Prosthodont. 2015;24(4):313–21.PubMedCrossRef
70.
Mandelli F, Ferrini F, Gastaldi G, Gherlone E, Ferrari M. Improvement of a Digital impression with conventional materials: overcoming Intraoral scanner Limitations. Int J Prosthodont. 2017;30(4):373–6.PubMedCrossRef
71.
Mehl A. A new concept for the integration of dynamic occlusion in the digital construction process. Int J Comput Dent. 2012;15(2):109–23.PubMed
72.
Gómez-Polo M, Piedra-Cascón W, Methani MM, Quesada-Olmo N, Farjas-Abadia M, Revilla-León M. Influence of rescanning mesh holes and stitching procedures on the complete-arch scanning accuracy of an intraoral scanner: an in vitro study. J Dent. 2021;110:103690.PubMedCrossRef
73.
Hayama H, Fueki K, Wadachi J, Wakabayashi N. Trueness and precision of digital impressions obtained using an intraoral scanner with different head size in the partially edentulous mandible. J Prosthodont Res. 2018;62(3):347–52.PubMedCrossRef
74.
Waldecker M, Rues S, Rammelsberg P, Bömicke W. Accuracy of complete-arch intraoral scans based on confocal microscopy versus optical triangulation: a comparative in vitro study. J Prosthet Dent. 2021;126(3):414–20.PubMedCrossRef
75.
Syrek A, Reich G, Ranftl D, Klein C, Cerny B, Brodesser J. Clinical evaluation of all-ceramic crowns fabricated from intraoral digital impressions based on the principle of active wavefront sampling. J Dent. 2010;38(7):553–9.PubMedCrossRef
76.
77.
78.
Wesemann C, Kienbaum H, Thun M, Spies BC, Beuer F, Bumann A. Does ambient light affect the accuracy and scanning time of intraoral scans? J Prosthet Dent. 2021;125(6):924–31.PubMedCrossRef
79.
Giménez B, Özcan M, Martínez-Rus F, Pradíes G. Accuracy of a digital impression system based on parallel confocal laser technology for implants with consideration of operator experience and implant angulation and depth. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2014;29(4):853–62.PubMedCrossRef
80.
Pesce P, Pera F, Setti P, Menini M. Precision and Accuracy of a digital impression scanner in full-arch Implant Rehabilitation. Int J Prosthodont. 2018;31(2):171–5.PubMedCrossRef
81.
Canullo L, Colombo M, Menini M, Sorge P, Pesce P. Trueness of Intraoral Scanners considering Operator experience and three different Implant scenarios: a preliminary Report. Int J Prosthodont. 2021;34(2):250–3.PubMedCrossRef
82.
Schunk DH. Learning Theories. 6th edition ed. Smith P, editor. Boston: Allyn & Bacon; 2012.
83.
Medina-Sotomayor P, Pascual-Moscardo A, Camps AI. Accuracy of 4 digital scanning systems on prepared teeth digitally isolated from a complete dental arch. J Prosthet Dent. 2019;121(5):811–20.PubMedCrossRef
84.
Zhang T, Wei T, Zhao Y, Jiang M, Yin X, Sun H. Evaluating the accuracy of three intraoral scanners using models containing different numbers of crown-prepared abutments. J Dent Sci. 2022;17(1):204–10.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of the learning curve of intraoral scanning with two different intraoral scanners based on scanning time
Authors
Ivett Róth
Péter Hermann
Viktória Vitai
Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács
Zoltán Géczi
Judit Borbély
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Oral Health / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6831
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-023-02963-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Oral Health 1/2023 Go to the issue

Research

Morphological evaluation of gonial and antegonial regions in bruxers on panoramic radiographic images

Research

Dental professionals’ views on motivational interviewing for the prevention of dental caries with adolescents in central Norway

Research

The caries impacts and experiences questionnaire for Turkish children by age groups’

Research

Survival analysis of implants after surgical treatment of peri-implantitis based on bone loss severity and surgical technique: a retrospective study

Research

Structural validity and reliability of the “Oral Health Assessment Tool” applied by speech-language therapists in a population of older Chilean people

Research

Perceptual and quantitative analysis of discoloration of orthodontic elastomeric chains by food