The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics (대한치과보철학회지)

The Korean Academy of Prosthodonitics (대한치과보철학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of patient satisfaction with digital and conventional impression for prosthodontic treatment

보철 치료 시 디지털 및 전통적 인상채득에 대한 환자 만족도 비교 연구

  • Yoon, Hyung-In (Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Su-Min (Graduate School of Clinical Dentistry, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Park, Eun-Jin (Department of Dentistry, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
  • 윤형인 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 치과학교실) ;
  • 이수민 (이화여자대학교 임상치의학대학원) ;
  • 박은진 (이화여자대학교 의과대학 치과학교실)
  • Received : 2016.08.18
  • Accepted : 2016.09.20
  • Published : 2016.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The present study aims at researching the subjective satisfaction of patients who have experienced both conventional impression taking and digital impression taking to measure the possibility of wide clinical application of digital impression. Materials and methods: The study surveyed 170 adult patients over the age of 20, between October 2015 and April 2016, who voluntarily consented to participation and who experienced both conventional impression and digital impression at five dental hospitals that use intraoral digital impression. A total of 128 surveys were used for data analysis, involving frequency analysis, multiple response frequency analysis, descriptive statistics, and contingency table analysis, with the significance level set at 0.05. Results: Responses on the reason for taking impressions using the digital method appeared in the order of 'for implant treatment' (43.8%), 'for crown treatment' (30.5%), and 'for inlay treatment' (15.6%). Patients satisfaction was higher for digital impression taking than conventional impression taking (P<.05). As the preferred choice of impression, digital impression (60.2%) was higher than conventional impression (11.7%). Responses on the reason for choosing digital impression taking appeared in the order of 'no vomiting reflex' (35.1%), 'reliability of 3D digital scanning' (33.8%), and 'short time' (33.8%). Conclusion: The patients preferred digital impression taking to conventional impression taking in terms of satisfaction.

목적: 본 연구에서는 전통적 인상채득과 디지털 인상채득을 모두 경험한 환자들의 만족도를 조사하여 다양한 항목에 대하여 비교 분석하고자 하였다. 재료 및 방법: 구강 내 디지털 인상채득의 방법을 사용하는 5개의 치과병원에서, 보철 치료를 위해 기존의 인상재를 이용한 방법과 디지털 인상채득을 모두 경험한 만 20세 이상의 성인 환자 170명을 대상으로, 2015년 10월부터 2016년 4월까지 설문조사를 실시하였다. 총128부의 설문지를 분석 자료로 이용하였으며, 빈도분석, 다중응답 빈도분석, 기술통계, 비모수 검정, 교차 분석을 시행하였고, 유의수준은 0.05로 설정하였다. 결과: 디지털 인상채득의 이유는 '임플란트치료'(43.8%), '크라운치료'(30.5%), '인레이치료'(15.6%) 순서로 나타났다. 전통적 인상채득의 평균 만족도보다 디지털 인상채득의 평균 만족도가 유의하게 더 높았다 (P<.05). 재선택하고 싶은 인상채득 방법으로는 전통적 인상채득(11.7%) 보다 디지털 인상채득(60.2%)이 더 높게 나타났다. 디지털 인상채득을 재선택한 이유로는 '구토반사가 없어서'(35.1%), '3D디지털 스캔이라 신뢰가 가서'(33.8%), '시간이짧아서'(33.8%) 순으로 나타났다. 결론: 환자 만족도 및 다시 선택하고 싶은 인상채득의 방법으로 전통적 인상채득 보다 디지털 인상채득의 선택이 더 높게 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Luthardt RG, Walter MH, Weber A, Koch R, Rudolph H. Clinical parameters influencing the accuracy of 1- and 2-stage impressions: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Prosthodont 2008;21:322-7.
  2. Jo HY. Comparison of the accuracy with digital impression system and conventional impression technique. Graduate School of Yonsei University; 2012.
  3. Linke BA, Nicholls JI, Faucher RR. Distortion analysis of stone casts made from impression materials. J Prosthet Dent 1985;54:794-802. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3913(85)90473-1
  4. Christensen GJ. The state of fixed prosthodontic impressions: room for improvement. J Am Dent Assoc 2005;136:343-6. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2005.0175
  5. Lee GT. Accuracy of digitized dental model made from white light scanner according to different scanning method. Graduate school of Korea University;2013.
  6. Kim SR. Comparison of parallel confocal laser scanning impression with conventional silicone impression regarding the marginal fitness and internal fitness of zirconia core. Graduate school of Korea University;2011.
  7. Kim JH. In vitro study on accuracy and reliability of dental model based on the digital intra-oral impression technique. Graduate school of Korea University;2012.
  8. Pyo SW, Park YB, Kim JH, Moon HS, Lee KW. Maxillary anterior all ceramic restoration using digital impression and CAD/CAM. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2011;49:263-9. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2011.49.3.263
  9. Hong YS, Park EJ, Kim SJ, Kim MR, Heo SJ, Park JM. Customized abutment and screw-type implant prostheses after cementation based on the digital intra-oral impression technique. J Korean Acad Prosthodont 2012;50:67-73. https://doi.org/10.4047/jkap.2012.50.1.67
  10. Christensen GJ. Impressions are changing: deciding on conventional, digital or digital plus in-office milling. J Am Dent Assoc 2009;140:1301-4. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2009.0054
  11. Duret F, Preston JD. CAD/CAM imaging in dentistry. Curr Opin Dent 1991;1:150-4.
  12. Kim JH. Evaluation of the intraoral scanning technique and the fitness of all-ceramic restoration in the digital workflow. Graduate school of Korea University; 2014.
  13. Choi JH, Lim YJ, Lee WJ, Han JS, Lee SP. Review of recent developments for intra-oral scanners. J Dent Rehabil Appl Sci 2015;31:112-25. https://doi.org/10.14368/jdras.2015.31.2.112
  14. Kim RW, Jang GW, Heo YR, Son MK. Understanding and application of digital impression in dentistry. Korean J Dent Mater 2014;41:253-61. https://doi.org/10.14815/kjdm.2014.41.4.253
  15. An S, Kim S, Choi H, Lee JH, Moon HS. Evaluating the marginal fit of zirconia copings with digital impressions with an intraoral digital scanner. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1171-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.12.024
  16. Lee WS, Kim WC, Kim HY, Kim WT, Kim JH. Evaluation of different approaches for using a laser scanner in digitization of dental impressions. J Adv Prosthodont 2014;6:22-9. https://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2014.6.1.22
  17. Abdel-Azim T, Zandinejad A, Elathamna E, Lin W, Morton D. The influence of digital fabrication options on the accuracy of dental implant-based single units and complete-arch frameworks. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:1281-8. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3577
  18. Papaspyridakos P, Chen CJ, Gallucci GO, Doukoudakis A, Weber HP, Chronopoulos V. Accuracy of implant impressions for partially and completely edentulous patients: a systematic review. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2014;29:836-45. https://doi.org/10.11607/jomi.3625
  19. Anh JW, Park JM, Chun YS, Kim M, Kim M. A comparison of the precision of three-dimensional images acquired by 2 digital intraoral scanners: effects of tooth irregularity and scanning direction. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:3-12. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2016.46.1.3
  20. 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;116:221-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2015.12.018
  21. Bae JW. A study on the color reproduction of digital intraoral scanner. Graduate school of Ewha Womans University;2014.
  22. Bindl A, Mormann WH. Clinical and SEM evaluation of all-ceramic chair-side CAD/CAM-generated partial crowns. Eur J Oral Sci 2003;111:163-9. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0722.2003.00022.x
  23. Seelbach P, Brueckel C, Wostmann B. Accuracy of digital and conventional impression techniques and workflow. Clin Oral Investig 2013;17:1759-64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-012-0864-4
  24. Stevens DR, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Raboud DW, Heo G, Major PW. Validity, reliability, and reproducibility of plaster vs digital study models: comparison of peer assessment rating and Bolton analysis and their constituent measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129:794-803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.08.023
  25. van der Meer WJ, Andriessen FS, Wismeijer D, Ren Y. Application of intra-oral dental scanners in the digital workflow of implantology. PLoS One 2012;7:e43312. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0043312
  26. Souza RO, ozcan M, Pavanelli CA, Buso L, Lombardo GH, Michida SM, Mesquita AM, Bottino MA. Marginal and internal discrepancies related to margin design of ceramic crowns fabricated by a CAD/CAM system. J Prosthodont 2012;21:94-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.2011.00793.x
  27. Nedelcu RG, Persson AS. Scanning accuracy and precision in 4 intraoral scanners: an in vitro comparison based on 3-dimensional analysis. J Prosthet Dent 2014;112:1461-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2014.05.027
  28. Lee SJ, Gallucci GO. Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes. Clin Oral Implants Res 2013;24:111-5. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0501.2012.02430.x
  29. 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;15:151. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-015-0140-5
  30. Kim KM. Likert scale. Korean J Fam Med 2011;32:1-2. https://doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.2011.32.1.1
  31. Wismeijer D, Mans R, van Genuchten M, Reijers HA. Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants. Clin Oral Implants Res 2014;25:1113-8. https://doi.org/10.1111/clr.12234
  32. Christensen GJ. Will digital impressions eliminate the current problems with conventional impressions? J Am Dent Assoc 2008;139:761-3. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.2008.0258
  33. Lee SJ, Macarthur RX 4th, Gallucci GO. An evaluation of student and clinician perception of digital and conventional implant impressions. J Prosthet Dent 2013;110:420-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prosdent.2013.06.012

Cited by

  1. 디지털 구강스캐너 임상적용 경험에 따른 치과위생사의 인지도 및 선호도 변화에 관한 융합연구 vol.9, pp.7, 2018, https://doi.org/10.15207/jkcs.2018.9.7.135
  2. 디지털 구강스캐너에 대한 치과위생사의 지식과 태도에 관한 인식도 분석 vol.19, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.13065/jksdh.20190007
  3. The Effects of Orthodontic Brackets on the Time and Accuracy of Digital Impression Taking vol.18, pp.10, 2016, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105282