Khaled E Ahmed1, Ting Wang2, Kar Yan Li2, Wai Kuen Luk2, Michael F Burrow3. 1. School of Dentistry and Oral Health, Parklands Dr, Southport, QLD, Australia. 2. Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. 3. Faculty of Dentistry, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China. Electronic address: mfburr58@hku.hk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the average full-arch scanning time, perception and likelihood of future adoption of technology by final-year dental students using three different Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) intraoral scanning systems. METHODS: Final-year undergraduate Dental Students (FDS), with no prior experience of intraoral scanning, full-arch scanned (IOS) a mannequin head-mounted model under supervision. Three scanning systems were used, TRIOS Colour (TRIOS); True Definition (TDef); and CEREC AC OmniCam (CEREC). Thereafter, FDS completed a questionnaire to assess their perception of IOS. Data were analysed by Generalized Estimating Equations, Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: Forty-nine FDS participated. Average full arch IOS time varied significantly (p<0.001) among the TRIOS, CEREC, and TDef, at 4min (n=48), 4min 42s (n=33), and 7min 32s (n=41) respectively. IOS using the TRIOS was significantly (p<0.001) the quickest, while TDef was the slowest (p<0.001). Seventy-one percent of FDS had positive overall IOS experience. FDS who reported intraoral scanning was timesaving compared with conventional impressions were more likely to adopt the technology after graduation (odds ratio (OR)=11.91, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.56-55.45, p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoral scanning performance of novice users varied significantly and was dependent on the scanning system used. The questionnaire showed that the overall IOS experience was positive amongst FDS. The perception of time-saving, when using IOS versus conventional impression methods, determined the likelihood of future adoption of the technology.
PURPOSE: To assess the average full-arch scanning time, perception and likelihood of future adoption of technology by final-year dental students using three different Computer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAD/CAM) intraoral scanning systems. METHODS: Final-year undergraduate Dental Students (FDS), with no prior experience of intraoral scanning, full-arch scanned (IOS) a mannequin head-mounted model under supervision. Three scanning systems were used, TRIOS Colour (TRIOS); True Definition (TDef); and CEREC AC OmniCam (CEREC). Thereafter, FDS completed a questionnaire to assess their perception of IOS. Data were analysed by Generalized Estimating Equations, Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression. RESULTS: Forty-nine FDS participated. Average full arch IOS time varied significantly (p<0.001) among the TRIOS, CEREC, and TDef, at 4min (n=48), 4min 42s (n=33), and 7min 32s (n=41) respectively. IOS using the TRIOS was significantly (p<0.001) the quickest, while TDef was the slowest (p<0.001). Seventy-one percent of FDS had positive overall IOS experience. FDS who reported intraoral scanning was timesaving compared with conventional impressions were more likely to adopt the technology after graduation (odds ratio (OR)=11.91, 95% confidence interval (CI)=2.56-55.45, p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoral scanning performance of novice users varied significantly and was dependent on the scanning system used. The questionnaire showed that the overall IOS experience was positive amongst FDS. The perception of time-saving, when using IOS versus conventional impression methods, determined the likelihood of future adoption of the technology.