Digital versus conventional prosthetic workflow for dental students providing implant-supported single crowns: A randomized crossover study

Abstract

Statement of problem: Digital scanning has become popular and has been reported to be more comfortable for patients and equally or more accurate than conventional impression techniques. However, clinical evidence to support the advantages of digital scanning is sparse. Purpose: The purpose of this randomized crossover study was to examine and compare the patient and provider perceptions of digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported single crowns (ISSCs) provided by dental students under supervision. Furthermore, the quality and patient-reported outcome of the definitive restorations were compared. Material and methods: Forty participants in need of a single tooth replacement were enrolled. Three months after initial implant placement, recordings were made for implant-supported crowns. The participants were randomized into a conventional or a digital group but underwent both procedures. Only the designated impression or scan was sent to the dental laboratory technician to be processed. All participants and students were asked questions concerning which technique they preferred. Furthermore, the participants filled out an oral health impact profile (OHIP-14) questionnaire before and after treatment. The restorations’ esthetic and technical quality was evaluated using the Copenhagen Index Score (CIS). Results: The participants preferred the digital technique (80%) over the conventional technique (2%), while 18% of the participants had no preference. The participants were bothered significantly more (P