Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient-related outcomes of conventional impression making versus intraoral scanning for prosthetic rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
de Paris Matos, Thalita; Wambier, Letícia Maíra; Favoreto, Michael Willian; Rezende, Carlos Eduardo Edwards; Reis, Alessandra; Loguercio, Alessandro Dourado; Gonzaga, Carla Castiglia.
Afiliación
  • de Paris Matos T; PhD student, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.
  • Wambier LM; Professor, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Universidade Positivo, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
  • Favoreto MW; MS student, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.
  • Rezende CEE; Professor, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Universidade Positivo, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil.
  • Reis A; Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.
  • Loguercio AD; Professor, Department of Restorative Dentistry, State University of Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, Brazil.
  • Gonzaga CC; Professor, School of Health Sciences, Graduate Program in Dentistry, Universidade Positivo, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil. Electronic address: carlacgonzaga2@gmail.com.
J Prosthet Dent ; 130(1): 19-27, 2023 Jul.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34756424
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Intraoral scanning has been reported to be preferred by patients over conventional impression making. Nevertheless, information regarding patient-related outcomes for conventional impression making and digital scanning is sparse. PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze patient-related outcomes of intraoral scanning and conventional impression methods. The primary outcomes evaluated were patient preference and satisfaction, and the secondary outcomes discomfort, nausea, unpleasant taste, breathing difficulty, pain, and anxiety. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Electronic and manual searches were performed for clinical trials that evaluated patient-related outcomes for intraoral scanning and conventional impression making for prosthetic rehabilitation. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale were used to assess the quality of the studies. Random-effects models using mean difference were used for meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q test and I2 statistics (α=.05). RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1626 articles, and 11 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Patients preferred intraoral scanning to conventional impression making. The mean difference for patient preference was 15.02 (95% confidence interval of 8.33 - 21.73; P<.001). Discomfort, absence of nausea, absence of unpleasant taste, and absence of breathing difficulty were also significantly different (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoral scanning is a suitable alternative to conventional impression procedures, promoting less discomfort for patients sensitive to taste, nausea, and breathing difficulty than when conventional impression making techniques are used.
Asunto(s)
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Técnica de Impresión Dental / Prioridad del Paciente Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Prosthet Dent Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Brasil Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Técnica de Impresión Dental / Prioridad del Paciente Tipo de estudio: Guideline / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Prosthet Dent Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Brasil Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos