• Journal of Korean Academy of Dental Administration
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.84-92
• /
• 2022

Impression taking is one of the most frequently performed tasks within the legal scope of dental hygienists. This study aims to compare traditional impression and digital impression taking in various aspects with dental hygienists who have experience using digital intraoral scanners. A total of 61 subjects were included in this analysis. Traditional and digital impression taking were compared, and the perception of intraoral scanners was classified into four factors through exploratory factor analysis. After a normality test of the main variables was performed, a non-parametric test was performed. In terms of the adequacy of the size of the tool inserted into the oral cavity, traditional impression taking was more positive, and there was no significant difference in the precision of impression taking, fit of the prosthesis, and time efficiency. In contrast, the digital intraoral scanner was positive in terms of reducing nausea. In the comparison between the items of the digital intraoral scanner, relatively low satisfaction was shown in terms of convenience of use. This study compared traditional impression taking based on the experience of dental hygienists using oral scanners. It is hoped that this will be one step closer to universalization. In addition, appropriate training on how to use them should be provided.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.33 no.3
• /
• pp.211-218
• /
• 2011

Purpose: The purpose of the study was a quantitative evaluation of common errors in digital impression procedure using CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC system. Methods: Two-hundreds digital impression data comprising 174 inlays, 26 onlays by CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC in-office CAD/CAM system were obtained from a dental clinic. One evaluator assessed errors of the digital impression data and divided into five categories of errors: inappropriate scanner positioning (ISP), improper handling with a scanner (IHS), irregular powder arrangement (IPA), improper cavity preparation (ICP), and insufficient scanned data (ISD). Results: The most common errors were IPA(21%), and ISP and ISD were followed by 17% respectively. IHS was found in 14.5% of all digital impression data. ICP comprising only 6.5% was the rarest. Conclusion: Most errors were due to inaccurate manipulation with an intraoral scanner or improper cavity preparation for scanning. A deliberate manipulation to prevent common errors mentioned may deliver an optimal result in the digital impression procedure.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.57 no.9
• /
• pp.524-528
• /
• 2019

With the advances of CAD-CAM (computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing) technology, the field of modern clinical dentistry has been dramatically changed. The first step in the digital workflow for tooth-supported dental prosthesis is a data acquisition with intraoral digital or conventional impression techniques. For the accuracy of intraoral digital impression data, the basic principles of conventional impression should be applied. It is necessary to obtain a good visibility with properly-dried field and well-exposed margin of the prepared abutment. Currently, the equi- or supra-gingival finish line can be recommended as an indication for intraoral digital impression. The scan data are generally exported to '.stl' file format, which has only morphological information of black and whitem while '.obj' file format can store data on color and texture.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.234-243
• /
• 2015

Developing of digital technique, it is possible to fabricate implant prostheses for edentulous area using intraoral 3-dimentional information throughout implant diagnosis and treatment process. It is being changed that from the method using CAD/CAM, producing prostheses by model scanning after conventional impression and model processing, to the method of fabricating implant provisional restorations and customized abutments by digital impression after connecting digital impression copings (scanbody) and implant fixtures without models. But, this digital method has not been actively used for implant prostheses not yet. Specially, it is short of intraoral digital impression cases for immediate provisional restorations of the maxillary anterior implants. The gingival contour impression of maxillary anterior area is very important for esthetic restorations. Accordingly, in this case report, the using a digital impression coping (scanbody) and digital impression by CEREC Omnicam (Sirona, Bensheim, Germany) or Trios (3shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) were introduced for immediate provisional restorations in 3 cases needed a single implant restoration in maxillary anterior area. The clinical results were satisfactory on the convenience and accuracy of digital impression technique and the good esthetics of final restorations.

• Journal of Korean society of Dental Hygiene
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.33-44
• /
• 2019

Objectives: To investigate how dental hygienists who have never used a digital oral scanner perceive the impression acquisition and evidence needed for prosthesis planning by using a digital oral scanner. Methods: From July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017, subjects from Daegu, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Korea, were selected. The purpose of the study was described to dental hygienists who had never used a digital intraoral scanner. Questionnaires were distributed to the students selected. Of the 137 questionnaires distributed, 93 were used in the analysis after excluding 44 completed questionnaires that had errors or missing answers. Results: Of the respondents, 33.7% (36/93) were aged ${\geq}30$ years, 68.8% graduated from a 3-year vocational college course, 33.5% were aged ${\geq}33$ years, and 61.3%. At present, our center has the largest number of clinics (92.5%). The difficulty of impression taking using the digital oral scanner significantly differed (p<0.05) according to age and current occupation (p<0.05). Impression taking using a digital oral scanner significantly affected the present workflow of dental hygienists and their interest in sharing information about future use of digital oral scanner (p<0.01). Conclusions: If more routes are available to access digital intraoral scanners and more systems are developed for clinical use, the digital intraoral scanner could become digitized in the dental system; thereby, the existing impressions could be replaced with digitized impressions. With digital intraoral scanners, the expansion of the business of dental hygiene can be expected.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.56 no.7
• /
• pp.366-374
• /
• 2018

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to compare the marginal fit of monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated form the conventional and the digital impression technique. Materials and methods : Ten patients were restored with monolithic zirconia restorations fabricated from the digital and the conventional impression technique. Before definitive insertion, silicone replicas were produced from all twenty crowns. The silicone replicas were cut in three sections; each section was evaluated at two points. The measurement was carried out by using a measuring microscope (Olympus BX 51) and I-Solution. Data from the silicone replica scores were analyzed by Shapiro-Wilk test for normal distribution and the t-test for equality of two population's mean. All tests were performed with ${\alpha}-level$ of 0.05. Results : The average marginal gaps of monolithic zirconia restorations were $133.81{\pm}36.46{\mu}m$ for the conventional impression technique, $90.07{\pm}9.47{\mu}m$ for the digital impression technique. No statistical differences were found between the two impression techniques Conclusion : Both prostheses presented clinically acceptable results with comparing the marginal fit.

• Journal of Technologic Dentistry
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.121-128
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the reliability and accuracy of measurements in digital models(CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC) compared to stone models. Methods: A master model(500B-1, Nissin Dental Product, Japan) with the prepared upper full arch tooth was used. Conventional impression and then stone model(n=10) were produced from this master model, and on the other hands, digital impressions were made with the CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC intra-oral scanner(n=10). One examiner measured two times the intercanine, intermolar distance, dental arch length. The stone model were measured using a digital caliper. The t-student test for paired samples and intraclass correlation coefficient(ICC) were used for statistical analysis. Results: The measurement of two methods showed very good reliability. At the intra-examiner reliability of measurement, ICC at the stone and CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC model were 0.81 and 0.94. The mean difference between measurements made directly on the stone models and those made on the CEREC$^{(R)}$ AC model was 0.20~0.28mm, and was statistically significant(P=0.001). Conclusion: These in vitro studies show that accuracy of the digital impression is similar to that of the conventional impression. These results will have to be confirmed in further clinical studies.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.52 no.6
• /
• pp.354-362
• /
• 2014

With the development of digital dentistry, various intra-oral scanners which acquire intraoral image without conventional impression taking and stone pouring steps have been introduced. Fixed dental prostheses such as inlay, onlay, crown, and bridge fabricated by CAD/CAM technique combined with digital impressions is getting popular due to the recent rapid progress of digital impression taking system. In comparison with traditional prosthetic procedure, the advantages of intraoral image acquiring and CAD/CAM technique are as follows; the omission of conventional impression materials, reduced workflow step, and increased efficiency by online communication with clinic and laboratory. This review article covers some opinions about the suitable scanning procedures for the various prosthodontic treatments and the utilization of digital intraoral scanner and CAD/CAM system.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.270-279
• /
• 2018

Purpose: The aim of this study was to assess the patients' perception, acceptance, and preference of the difference between a conventional impression and digital impression through questionnaire survey. Materials and Methods: Thirteen (6 male, 7 female) subjects who experienced both digital and conventional impression at the same day were enrolled in this study. Conventional impression were taken with polyvinylsiloxane and digital impression were performed using a newly developed intra-oral scanner. Immediately after the two impressions were made, a survey was conducted with the standardized questionnaires consisting of the following three categories; 1) general dental treatment 2) satisfaction of conventional impression 3) satisfaction of digital impression. The perceived source of satisfaction was evaluated using Likert scale. The distribution of the answers was assessed by percentages and statistical analyses were performed with the paired t-test, and P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: There were significant differences of the overall satisfaction between two impression methods (P < 0.05). Digital impression showed high satisfaction in less shortness of breath and odor to participants compared to conventional impression. The use of an oral scanner resulted in a discomfort of TMJ due to prolonged mouth opening and in lower score of the scanner tip size. Conclusion: It was confirmed that the preference for the digital impression using intraoral scanner is higher than the conventional impression. Most survey participants said they would recommend the digital impression to others and said they preferred it for future prosthetic treatment.

• The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics
• /
• v.11 no.5
• /
• pp.271-279
• /
• 2019

PURPOSE. The newest technologies for digital implant impression (DII) taking are developing rapidly and showing acceptable clinical results. However, scientific literature is lacking data from clinical studies about the accuracy of DII. The aim of this study was to compare digital and conventional dental implant impressions (CII) in a clinical environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Twenty-four fixed zirconia restorations supported by 2 implants were fabricated using conventional open-tray impression technique with splinted transfers (CII group) and scan with Trios 3 IOS (3Shape) (DII group). After multiple verification procedures, master models were scanned using laboratory scanner D800 (3Shape). 3D models from conventional and digital workflow were imported to reverse engineering software and superimposed with high resolution 3D CAD models of scan bodies. Distance between center points, angulation, rotation, vertical shift, and surface mismatch of the scan bodies were measured and compared between conventional and digital impressions. RESULTS. Statistically significant differences were found for: a) inter-implant distance, b) rotation, c) vertical shift, and d) surface mismatch differences, comparing DII and CII groups for mesial and distal implant scan bodies ($P{\leq}.05$). CONCLUSION. Recorded linear differences between digital and conventional impressions were of limited clinical significance with two implant-supported restorations.