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

dc.authorwosid Yilmaz, Hakan/Jvo-9077-2024
dc.contributor.author Yilmaz, Hakan
dc.contributor.author Konca, Fatma Asli
dc.contributor.author Aydin, Merve Nur
dc.date.accessioned 2024-05-25T12:34:05Z
dc.date.available 2024-05-25T12:34:05Z
dc.date.issued 2021
dc.department Okan University en_US
dc.department-temp [Yilmaz, Hakan] Yeditepe Univ, Dept Orthodont, Fac Dent, Istanbul, Turkey; [Konca, Fatma Asli] Biruni Univ, Dept Orthodont, Fac Dent, Istanbul, Turkey; [Aydin, Merve Nur] Instanbul Okan Univ, Dept Paediat Dent, Fac Dent, Istanbul, Turkey en_US
dc.description.abstract 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. en_US
dc.description.woscitationindex Emerging Sources Citation Index
dc.identifier.citationcount 1
dc.identifier.doi 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2021.21025
dc.identifier.endpage 233 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2148-9505
dc.identifier.issue 4 en_US
dc.identifier.pmid 35110223
dc.identifier.scopus 2-s2.0-85128326377
dc.identifier.scopusquality Q2
dc.identifier.startpage 227 en_US
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2021.21025
dc.identifier.volume 34 en_US
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000738706300004
dc.identifier.wosquality N/A
dc.language.iso en
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Aves en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategory Makale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı en_US
dc.rights info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess en_US
dc.scopus.citedbyCount 1
dc.subject Intraoral Scanner en_US
dc.subject Dental Impression en_US
dc.subject Patient Comfort en_US
dc.subject Dental Anxiety en_US
dc.subject Clinical Efficiency en_US
dc.title An Updated Comparison of Current Impression Techniques Regarding Time, Comfort, Anxiety, and Preference: a Randomized Crossover Trial en_US
dc.type Article en_US

Files