- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT06857721
Comfort Assessment of Intraoral Scanners in Children (RCT-CS)
Evaluation of Intraoral Scanners in Terms of Comfort in Pediatric Patients: A Crossover Randomized Trial
With the advancement of the digital age, dentistry has been one of the fields that has benefited most from technological innovations. Among these advancements, digital intraoral scanners, which precisely capture the three-dimensional geometry of objects, have become widely used, particularly in prosthodontics and orthodontics. The increasing integration of digitalization in pediatric dentistry has also improved treatment processes, making them more efficient and comfortable for both patients and clinicians.
Previous studies comparing conventional and digital impression techniques suggest that patients generally prefer digital scanning due to improved comfort and reduced procedural time. However, research on pediatric patients remains limited, with most studies focusing on general performance rather than specific patient experiences. Given the unique anatomical and psychological characteristics of children, a comprehensive evaluation of comfort perception in different intraoral scanners is necessary.
This study aims to assess the effects of two different intraoral scanners on pediatric patients' comfort perception. It is designed as a single-center, randomized controlled crossover study, approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Dentistry at Batman University. A total of 68 children meeting the inclusion criteria were recruited and randomly assigned to undergo intraoral scanning with two different devices (IteroTM and 3ShapeTM) at separate visits. Comfort levels were assessed using the Animale Emoji Scale (AES), a validated tool for measuring children's emotional responses to procedures.
By comparing the comfort perception of different intraoral scanners in pediatric patients, this study aims to provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians in selecting the most patient-friendly digital impression techniques, ultimately improving patient experience and clinical workflow in pediatric dentistry.
To prevent bias during the procedure, the intraoral scan was performed using either the Itero™ or 3Shape™ device, determined by simple randomization. Since the sample consisted of consecutive cases, random selection was performed by coin toss.
At the first appointment, parents or legal guardians were informed about the study, a consent form was provided, and they were informed that they would be contacted again if they wished to participate. The first scan was performed using the Itero Element 2D (Align Technology, San Jose, CA, USA) device.
The second appointment was scheduled 7 to 30 days after the initial appointment to avoid affecting children's comfort, in accordance with previous studies. The second scan was planned using the 3Shape Trios 3 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) device.
All intraoral scans were performed by the principal investigator of the study. According to the manufacturer's instructions, the patient was scanned in a supine position following the same sequence (lower jaw, upper jaw, and bite registration).
To increase the reliability of the results, all measurements were taken by a single experienced researcher who took at least 100 measurements with both scanning devices. To ensure standardization, all patients were positioned at 11 o'clock relative to the unit and the scanning device was positioned at 1 o'clock for all scans.
The primary outcome of the study was patient comfort. Participants' comfort was measured using the Animated Emoji Scale (AES) based on questions prepared during the procedure. Children were asked to select the face that best reflected their feelings after the procedure (Figure 1). For younger children, the AES scale was completed under the supervision of the operator and with guiding questions. The AES scale includes 6 different facial expressions ranging from "no pain" to "worst pain," and each face is scored from 0-2-4-6-8-10. These measurements were always taken by the same observer.
Sample size was calculated using G*Power, and data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS 21® Software (Armonk, NY, USA). The normality of the data was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk's and/or Kolmogorov Smirnov tests. The significance level was set at p<0.05. In case of deviation from the normal distribution, differences between groups were examined using the Mann Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis-H tests. In case of a significant difference in the Kruskal Wallis-H test, a Post-Hoc multiple comparison test was applied. Differences between two dependent variables were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test.
Study Overview
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
-
Diyarbakir, Turkey, 21070
- Dental In Oral and Dental Health Polyclinic
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Child
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
Healthy children Children have no experience with dental measurement techniques or intraoral scanning.
Exclusion Criteria:
Children with craniofacial syndromes Children with systemic diseases Children with Behavioral problems
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
- Allocation: N/A
- Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Digital scanner group
It consists of children whose digital measurements were taken with the Itero scanner in the first appointment and with the 3Shape scanner in the second appointment.
|
Intraoral scanners for pediatric patients
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
Differences Between Genders in Children's Responses During Measurements Made with the IteroTM
Time Frame: 15 minutes
|
15 minutes
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Time Frame |
|---|---|
|
Differences Between Genders in Children's Responses During Measurements Made with the 3ShapeTM
Time Frame: 15 minutes
|
15 minutes
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Actual)
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- NK01
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
IPD Sharing Time Frame
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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 Intraoral Scanner
-
Marmara UniversityCompleted
-
Marmara UniversityCompletedColor | Trueness | Intraoral Scanner | RubberdamTurkey
-
University of SheffieldNottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustNot yet recruitingTime | Cost | Intraoral Scanner | Alginate ImpressionUnited Kingdom
-
Diakonhjemmet HospitalOslo University HospitalCompleted
-
Cairo UniversityCompletedAdolescent Behavior | Intra-oral ScannerEgypt
-
Nihon UniversityUnknownRelationship Between Electrical Pain Tolerance Threshold of Alveolar Ridge and Individual AttributesIntraoral Pain ThresholdJapan
-
Aydin Adnan Menderes UniversityRecruitingCaries | Gingival Index | Periodontal Index | Oral Health Care | Oral Health Literacy | Intraoral ImagesTurkey (Türkiye)
-
Clinical Hospital Centre ZagrebRecruitingIntraoral TumorCroatia
-
Eda Cetin OzdemirCompletedNdirectly Measuring the Difference Between the Free Gingival Graft and the Free Gingival Unit Via a ScannerTurkey
-
Marwa Mohamed AliUnknownPeriodontal Bone Defects Will be Detected and Measured by 2 Techniques CBCT and Intraoral Digital Radiography to Compare the Accuracy of These Techniques
Clinical Trials on Intraoral Scanners
-
University of SharjahNot yet recruitingDental Implants | Edentulous Jaw | Edentulous Mouth
-
Oslo University HospitalOslo Metropolitan UniversityCompleted
-
Assiut UniversityNot yet recruitingSpondyloarthropathy and Sacroilitis
-
Abdelrahman Khalaf EldabeActive, not recruitingEdentulism | Implant-supported Full-arch Prosthesis | Digital Impression Accuracy | Photogrammetry in DentistryEgypt
-
Oslo University HospitalOslo Metropolitan UniversityCompletedOral Cavity Cancer | Sinonasal CancerNorway
-
Brigham and Women's HospitalActive, not recruiting
-
Loma Linda UniversityRecruitingTooth Loss | Implant Site ReactionUnited States
-
Universidad Complutense de MadridRecruitingDental Prosthesis, Implant-SupportedSpain
-
VA Boston Healthcare SystemMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyRecruitingObstructive Sleep Apnea of AdultUnited States