Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
To assess and compare the accuracy of digital scans obtained using three different scanning protocols -conventional scan bodies, Intra-oral photogrammetry, and calibrated scan flags- on completely edentulous dental model with full-arch implants.
Digital scans have revolutionized prosthetic workflows by offering increased efficiency and accuracy compared to conventional techniques . Studies highlight that their accuracy depends on the scanning protocol and equipment used. Conventional scan bodies, which are well-established and commonly used for digital scans, are generally reliable; however, their accuracy can be influenced by factors such as angulation, the number of implants, and the scanning technique. Intra-oral photogrammetry has gained attention for its ability to accurately record implant positions without relying on physical scan bodies . Many systems utilize this technology to improve accuracy, particularly in complex full-arch cases, though direct comparisons with other methods remain limited. Calibrated Scan Flags represent a novel approach, incorporating enhanced features to reduce errors associated with angulation and improve the capture of implant positions. While initial studies suggest improved precision, further comparative data are required . Previous research comparing these methods often focuses on isolated factors, such as time efficiency or user preferences, with limited emphasis on accuracy. Therefore, a direct comparative analysis of these three scanning protocols is needed to address this gap.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| conventional scan bodies | Active Comparator | Digital scans using conventional scan bodies scanned with a desktop scanner. |
|
| scan bodies scanned with an intra-oral scanner | Experimental | Digital scans using conventional scan bodies scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| intra-oral photogrammetry | Experimental | Digital scans using intra-oral photogrammetry scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| calibrated scan flags | Experimental | Digital scans using calibrated scan flags scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intervention 1 | Procedure | Digital scans using conventional scan bodies scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy of multiunit abutment positions | positions and angles of the multiunit abutments | 7 days |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mohamed Sherif El Saharty | Contact | 01001646146 | 002 | saharty@hotmail.com |
Not provided
Not provided
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 34893053 | Result | Ma B, Yue X, Sun Y, Peng L, Geng W. Accuracy of photogrammetry, intraoral scanning, and conventional impression techniques for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: an in vitro comparative study. BMC Oral Health. 2021 Dec 10;21(1):636. doi: 10.1186/s12903-021-02005-0. | |
| 24278919 | Result | Buzayan M, Baig MR, Yunus N. Evaluation of accuracy of complete-arch multiple-unit abutment-level dental implant impressions using different impression and splinting materials. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants. 2013 Nov-Dec;28(6):1512-20. doi: 10.11607/jomi.2958. |
Not provided
Not provided
Will be decided after getting the results
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Intervention 2 | Procedure | Digital scans using intra-oral photogrammetry scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| Intervention 3 | Procedure | Digital scans using calibrated scan flags scanned with an intra-oral scanner. |
|
| Control | Procedure | Digital scans using conventional scan bodies scanned with a desktop scanner. |
|