The Potential of Digital Impression in Orthodontics.

aligners dental dental impression materials dental impression technique diagnosis digital work-flow oral technology

Journal

Dentistry journal
ISSN: 2304-6767
Titre abrégé: Dent J (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101716125

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 Aug 2022
Historique:
received: 10 06 2022
revised: 21 07 2022
accepted: 28 07 2022
entrez: 25 8 2022
pubmed: 26 8 2022
medline: 26 8 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Over the past 20 years, there have been many innovations in orthodontic diagnosis and therapy. Among the innovations, there is the taking of dental impressions (DIs). Dental impressions are the negative imprint of hard and soft tissues of one or both arches, and they allow a plaster model to be formed, i.e., a positive reproduction. Traditional dental impressions can be made of different materials, such as alginate, while digital impression is captured by an intra-oral scanner. Digital impression, despite the evident advantages, has not yet replaced the conventional impression. The aim of this study is to evaluate which dental impressions are the most used by dentists. For this purpose, we considered 120 questionnaires sent electronically to patients of different dental private practices from different countries, where the dentists can use both techniques. The results highlighted that the kind of impression adopted is very much influenced by the type of therapy and orthodontic devices used in the treatment. We can conclude that, despite the advent of digital technology, conventional impressions are still used for fixed devices, while digital impressions are more adopted for orthodontic customized devices and therapies with clear aligners, that are very widespread among adult patients.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Over the past 20 years, there have been many innovations in orthodontic diagnosis and therapy. Among the innovations, there is the taking of dental impressions (DIs). Dental impressions are the negative imprint of hard and soft tissues of one or both arches, and they allow a plaster model to be formed, i.e., a positive reproduction. Traditional dental impressions can be made of different materials, such as alginate, while digital impression is captured by an intra-oral scanner. Digital impression, despite the evident advantages, has not yet replaced the conventional impression. The aim of this study is to evaluate which dental impressions are the most used by dentists. For this purpose, we considered 120 questionnaires sent electronically to patients of different dental private practices from different countries, where the dentists can use both techniques. The results highlighted that the kind of impression adopted is very much influenced by the type of therapy and orthodontic devices used in the treatment. We can conclude that, despite the advent of digital technology, conventional impressions are still used for fixed devices, while digital impressions are more adopted for orthodontic customized devices and therapies with clear aligners, that are very widespread among adult patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36005245
pii: dj10080147
doi: 10.3390/dj10080147
pmc: PMC9406442
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Références

J Prosthet Dent. 2018 Feb;119(2):225-232
pubmed: 28689906
Dent J (Basel). 2022 Jan 20;10(2):
pubmed: 35200241
Materials (Basel). 2020 Apr 23;13(8):
pubmed: 32340384
J Am Dent Assoc. 2013 Aug;144(8):914-20
pubmed: 23904578
Materials (Basel). 2022 Feb 25;15(5):
pubmed: 35268969
BMC Oral Health. 2017 Dec 12;17(1):149
pubmed: 29233132
J Clin Exp Dent. 2020 Sep 1;12(9):e896-e901
pubmed: 32994882
J Prosthodont. 2015 Jun;24(4):313-21
pubmed: 25220390
Int J Comput Dent. 2017;20(2):123-149
pubmed: 28630955
J Orthod. 2015 Jun;42(2):136-43
pubmed: 25939980
Dental Press J Orthod. 2021 Dec 15;26(6):e21spe6
pubmed: 34932716
J Prosthodont Res. 2020 Apr;64(2):109-113
pubmed: 31474576
BMC Oral Health. 2014 Jan 30;14:10
pubmed: 24479892
J Orofac Orthop. 2016 Nov;77(6):409-419
pubmed: 27595882
J Prosthet Dent. 2013 Nov;110(5):420-3
pubmed: 23998623
Medicina (Kaunas). 2022 Apr 27;58(5):
pubmed: 35630020
Angle Orthod. 2019 Nov;89(6):868-875
pubmed: 31259615
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2017 Oct;28(10):1318-1323
pubmed: 27596805
Dent Mater J. 2018 Jul 29;37(4):628-633
pubmed: 29669951
J Oral Sci. 2018;60(1):1-7
pubmed: 29576569
J Prosthet Dent. 2014 Sep;112(3):444-8
pubmed: 24882595
BMC Oral Health. 2020 Oct 19;20(1):287
pubmed: 33076894
Dent Mater. 2012 Jan;28(1):3-12
pubmed: 22119539
Int J Comput Dent. 2015;18(2):101-29
pubmed: 26110925
Mar Drugs. 2018 Dec 29;17(1):
pubmed: 30597945
J Prosthet Dent. 2020 Nov;124(5):581-588
pubmed: 31870614
Open Dent J. 2018 Jan 31;12:118-124
pubmed: 29492177
Niger J Clin Pract. 2021 Jul;24(7):1086-1091
pubmed: 34290188
PLoS One. 2017 Jun 21;12(6):e0179188
pubmed: 28636642
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2013 Jan;24(1):111-5
pubmed: 22353208
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jan 27;19(3):
pubmed: 35162430
BMC Med Educ. 2019 Mar 12;19(1):81
pubmed: 30866910
J Healthc Eng. 2017;2017:8427595
pubmed: 29065652

Auteurs

Sabina Saccomanno (S)

Department of Health, Life and Environmental Science, University of L'Aquila, Piazza Salvatore Tommasi, 67100 L'Aquila, Italy.

Stefano Saran (S)

Department of Human Sciences, Innovation and Territory, School of Dentistry, Postgraduate of Orthodontics, University of Insubria, 21100 Varese, Italy.

Valeria Vanella (V)

Dental School, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.

Rodolfo Francesco Mastrapasqua (RF)

ENT Department, Rivoli Hospital, ASL TORINO 3, 10098 Torino, Italy.

Luca Raffaelli (L)

Dental School, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, 00168 Rome, Italy.

Luca Levrini (L)

Department of Human Sciences, Innovation and Territory, School of Dentistry, Postgraduate of Orthodontics, University of Insubria, 21100 Varese, Italy.

Classifications MeSH