Comparative Evaluation Of Accuracy, Chair Side Time And Patient Experience Of Conventional Open Tray And Digital Implant Impression For Partially Edentulous Patient – An In Vivo Study

Abstract

Aim:
This study aims to evaluate and compare the accuracy, chairside time, and patient experience of conventional open tray and digital implant impressions for partially edentulous patients.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 22 patients were selected and divided into two groups: Group 1 of conventional splinted open tray impressions and Group 2 of digital intraoral scanning. Key materials included implant scan bodies, polyvinyl siloxane, type IV gypsum, and a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) for accuracy assessment. Each participant underwent both techniques, with measurements taken for inter-implant distance, linear displacement, angular displacement, chairside time, and patient experience, assessed via a Likert scale questionnaire. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS software.

Results:
The study found no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in accuracy between conventional and digital implant impressions concerning inter-implant distance, linear displacement, and angular displacement. However, chairside time was significantly lower for digital impressions (p<0.05), with an average of 10.59 minutes compared to 18.64 minutes for the conventional technique. Patient experience was notably improved with digital impressions (p=0.001), as they minimized discomfort and procedural time.

Conclusion:
Both conventional and digital impressions provide accurate results in implant positioning. However, digital impressions offer significant advantages in reducing chairside time and enhancing patient comfort. Factors such as cost, operator expertise, and scanner type must be considered before widespread adoption. Future research should explore larger sample sizes, long-term clinical outcomes, and advancements in artificial intelligence to optimize digital impression accuracy further.