Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study
Abstract Background The spread of digital technology in dentistry poses new challenges and sets new goals for dentists. The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine the learning curve of intraoral scanning described by (1) scanning time and (2) image number (count of images created by intra...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2020-10-01
|
| Series: | BMC Oral Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-020-01278-1 |
| _version_ | 1818301703045251072 |
|---|---|
| author | Ivett Róth Alexandra Czigola Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács Magdolna Dalos Péter Hermann Judit Borbély |
| author_facet | Ivett Róth Alexandra Czigola Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács Magdolna Dalos Péter Hermann Judit Borbély |
| author_sort | Ivett Róth |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The spread of digital technology in dentistry poses new challenges and sets new goals for dentists. The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine the learning curve of intraoral scanning described by (1) scanning time and (2) image number (count of images created by intraoral scanner during the scanning process). Methods Ten dental students of Semmelweis University took part in the study. Dental students took digital study impressions using a 3Shape Trios 3® (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) intraoral scanning device. Each student took 10 digital impressions on volunteers. Volunteer inclusion criteria included full dentition (except for missing third molars) and no prosthetic/restorative treatment. Digital impression taking was preceded by tuition consisting of both theoretical education and practical training. Digital impressions were taken of the upper and lower arches, and the bite was recorded according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total scanning times and image numbers were recorded. Results The difference in scanning time between the first and the tenth digital impressions was significant (p = 0.007). The average scanning time for the first impressions was 23 min 9 s; for the tenth impressions, it was 15 min 28 s. The difference between the scanning times of the first and the tenth procedures was 7 min 41 s. The average image count for the first impressions was 1964.5; for the tenth impressions, it was 1468.6. The image count difference between the first and the tenth procedures was 495.9. The image count versus sequential number of measurement curve shows an initial decreasing tendency followed by a trough around the sixth measurement and a final increasing phase. Conclusion Our results indicate an association between the sequential number of measurements and the outcome variables. The drop in scanning time is probably explained by a practice effect of repeated use, i.e. the students learned to move the scanning tip faster. The image count first showed a decreasing tendency, and after the sixth measurement, it increased; there was no consistent decline in mean scan count. Shorter scanning times are associated with poorer coverage quality, with the operator needing to make corrections by adding extra images; this manifests as the time function of image counts taking an increase after the sixth measurement. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-13T05:27:13Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-fbe1052199db4eee80933a7d3332a02e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1472-6831 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-13T05:27:13Z |
| publishDate | 2020-10-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Oral Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-fbe1052199db4eee80933a7d3332a02e2022-12-21T23:58:09ZengBMCBMC Oral Health1472-68312020-10-012011710.1186/s12903-020-01278-1Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo studyIvett Róth0Alexandra Czigola1Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács2Magdolna Dalos3Péter Hermann4Judit Borbély5Department of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityDepartment of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityDepartment of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityDepartment of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityDepartment of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityDepartment of Prosthodontics, Semmelweis UniversityAbstract Background The spread of digital technology in dentistry poses new challenges and sets new goals for dentists. The aim of the present in vivo study was to determine the learning curve of intraoral scanning described by (1) scanning time and (2) image number (count of images created by intraoral scanner during the scanning process). Methods Ten dental students of Semmelweis University took part in the study. Dental students took digital study impressions using a 3Shape Trios 3® (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) intraoral scanning device. Each student took 10 digital impressions on volunteers. Volunteer inclusion criteria included full dentition (except for missing third molars) and no prosthetic/restorative treatment. Digital impression taking was preceded by tuition consisting of both theoretical education and practical training. Digital impressions were taken of the upper and lower arches, and the bite was recorded according to the manufacturer's instructions. Total scanning times and image numbers were recorded. Results The difference in scanning time between the first and the tenth digital impressions was significant (p = 0.007). The average scanning time for the first impressions was 23 min 9 s; for the tenth impressions, it was 15 min 28 s. The difference between the scanning times of the first and the tenth procedures was 7 min 41 s. The average image count for the first impressions was 1964.5; for the tenth impressions, it was 1468.6. The image count difference between the first and the tenth procedures was 495.9. The image count versus sequential number of measurement curve shows an initial decreasing tendency followed by a trough around the sixth measurement and a final increasing phase. Conclusion Our results indicate an association between the sequential number of measurements and the outcome variables. The drop in scanning time is probably explained by a practice effect of repeated use, i.e. the students learned to move the scanning tip faster. The image count first showed a decreasing tendency, and after the sixth measurement, it increased; there was no consistent decline in mean scan count. Shorter scanning times are associated with poorer coverage quality, with the operator needing to make corrections by adding extra images; this manifests as the time function of image counts taking an increase after the sixth measurement.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-020-01278-1Digital impression takingIntraoral scannerLearning curve |
| spellingShingle | Ivett Róth Alexandra Czigola Gellért Levente Joós-Kovács Magdolna Dalos Péter Hermann Judit Borbély Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study BMC Oral Health Digital impression taking Intraoral scanner Learning curve |
| title | Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study |
| title_full | Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study |
| title_fullStr | Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study |
| title_full_unstemmed | Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study |
| title_short | Learning curve of digital intraoral scanning – an in vivo study |
| title_sort | learning curve of digital intraoral scanning an in vivo study |
| topic | Digital impression taking Intraoral scanner Learning curve |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12903-020-01278-1 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ivettroth learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy AT alexandraczigola learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy AT gellertleventejooskovacs learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy AT magdolnadalos learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy AT peterhermann learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy AT juditborbely learningcurveofdigitalintraoralscanninganinvivostudy |