The Accuracy of Intraoral Scanning Systems for Full-Arch Impressions Is Examined in 10 Participants
In Vivo Accuracy of Digital Intraoral Scans/Optical Impression Systems for the Production of Full-Arch Impressions
For several decades now, modern procedures have allowed dentists to capture your teeth using digital cameras. This digital procedure is increasingly replacing traditional impressions with a viscous mass that hardens in the mouth.
In the following study, the investigators want to find out whether the accuracy of these modern methods is comparable to the classic impression technique.
Three conventional impressions are taken for this purpose, and multiple digital impressions are also taken with each of the intraoral scanners. The impressions are then compared with each other. This allows the accuracy of the different intraoral scanners to be determined.
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
In summary, this study intends to address the need for comprehensive in vivo research on the accuracy of intraoral impression methods, especially in the context of modern digital technologies. By comparing various digital and conventional methods, this research will offer valuable information to guide dental practitioners in choosing the most precise and reliable techniques for their clinical applications.
The following study design is planned:
The study is non-randomised. The study setup is monocentric. At the beginning of the session, 3 conventional impression each of the upper and lower jaw is taken. After 8 hours the impression is moulded by a dental technician with a SuperHard plaster (type 4).After 48 hours of setting time the plaster-model is scanned with a lab scanner (inEos X5, Dentsply Sirona) to generate a .stl-file that is comparable to the following digital impressions.
This is followed by 6 digital impressions of the upper and lower jaw and the associated bite registration in habitual occlusion, divided between two experienced practitioners (3 upper, 3 lower jaw scans, 3 bite registrations per practitioner) with the 8 different intra oral scanners. In total, 6 conventional (3 upper, 3 lower jaw impressions), 48 digital impressions and 48 bite registration are taken. If it is not possible to take all the impressions in one session, a new conventional impression is taken at the start of each new session, so that a daily updated reference model is always available. Minimizing bias is achieved, by using the intra oral scanners according to the manufacturers instructions.
The number of scans was calculated as part of a power analysis based on previous study results and should therefore be meaningful.
The selection of scanners represents a heterogeneous selection of devices currently on the market. The scanners come from different price categories and use different optical measuring principles.
The precision measurement is carried out by comparing the impressions within and between the tested groups (precision and trueness respectively). For that, the scans will be exported to STL & PLY format (depending on the scanning device) and imported into evaluation programs (Dentexion, Dentexion and Control X, Geomagic). The evaluation process follows the ISO 5725-1 criteria. After superimposition of the mesh surfaces according to the best-fit alignment, the distances will be measured point-to-point using the signed nearest neighbor method and sorted into a histogram. From that, the distance measure for each pairwise surface superimposition will be calculated from the (90%-10%)/2 percentile value.
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Albert Mehl, Prof. Dr. Dr.
- Phone Number: +41 446343276
- Email: albert.mehl@zzm.uzh.ch
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Andreas Ender, PD Dr. med. dent.
- Phone Number: +41 446343193
- Email: andreas.ender@zzm.uzh.ch
Study Locations
-
-
-
Zurich, Switzerland, 8032
- University of Zurich, Center for Dental Medicine
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- All genders, minimum age for participation is 18 years
- Good general health and healthy dental conditions (gaps with a maximum of 1 missing tooth are permitted)
- Written consent after informed consent discussion is available
Exclusion Criteria:
- participants under the age of 18
- Addicts or participants with impaired cognitive abilities that do not allow the participant to assess the scope of the study
- participants suffering from periodontitis (pathological tooth mobility could falsify the study results)
- Maximal mouth opening less than 3.5 cm
- participants who wear large reconstructive works and/or have a free-end situation from at least the 2nd premolar
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Other: Comparison conventional impression vs. digital impression
The investigators would like to investigate the accuracy of various intraoral scanning systems. For this a conventional impression is taken from all patients to generate a reference model, which is then compared to full-arch impressions from various digital intraoral scanning systems. The examination is carried out in the same way for all participants. |
Only conventional and digital impressions (comparable with taking videography) are taken of the patients teeth.
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Accuracy measurement of digital impressions performed with optical impression systems are primary endpoints
Time Frame: It is intended that all impressions take place within half a day, the accuracy measurement should be carried out within 6 weeks.
|
The accuracy of the intraoral scanners (primary endpoint) is analyzed on the basis of precision and trueness. The unit of measure used is the same (μm). The trueness of each test group is assessed by superimposing each scan with the reference model data set. The precision is calculated as the mean difference between all superimpositions within one test group. |
It is intended that all impressions take place within half a day, the accuracy measurement should be carried out within 6 weeks.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 2024-00618
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.
Clinical Trials on Full-arch Impression
-
NCT07550725Not yet recruitingTruness of Impression Techniques in All on x Cases | Trueness of Full Arch Implant Prosthesis Impression
-
NCT07320729Active, not recruitingEdentulism | Implant-supported Full-arch Prosthesis | Digital Impression Accuracy | Photogrammetry in Dentistry
-
NCT07212855Completed
-
NCT07235072Not yet recruitingPassive Fit of Full-arch Implant Prostheses
-
NCT07370701CompletedPassivity of Co-Cr Full-arch Maxillary Prostheses Via IOS
-
NCT05617274CompletedMandibular Flexure | Full Arch Fixed Prosthesis
-
NCT06963242RecruitingAccuracy of Dynamic Navigation System in Implant Placement for Full Arch Prosthesis Rehabilitation
-
NCT01104363WithdrawnDental Implants | Dental Impression Materials | Dental Impression Techniques
-
NCT07377890RecruitingDental Impression Techniques | Edentulism | Complete Dentures | Digital Impression Accuracy
-
NCT03564717UnknownInaccurate Transfer and Bond Failure of Conventional Indirect Bonding Tray | Accuracy of Bracket Transfer and Bond Failure Rate of Full Arch and Segmented Digitally Printed Trays
Clinical Trials on impression of the teeth
-
NCT06267989RecruitingRandomized Clinical Trial | Palatal Expansion Technique | Ectopic Tooth Eruption
-
NCT05492864CompletedAnterior Openbite Malocclusion
-
NCT05920525CompletedClass II Malocclusion, Division 1
-
NCT06610383Completed
-
NCT06112366CompletedTooth Diseases | Tooth, Impacted
-
NCT05232591Not yet recruitingApical Periodontitis
-
NCT06067542CompletedTooth Diseases | Tooth Impaction
-
NCT01154257CompletedGingivitis | Dental Plaque
-
NCT07289074Not yet recruitingSymptomatic Irreversible Pulpitis With Apical Peridontitis
-
NCT07597408Active, not recruitingA Comparsion Between Articaine Hydrochloride and Buffered Lidocaine Hydrochloride