A comparison of patient experience, chair-side time, accuracy of dental arch measurements and costs of acquisition of dental models

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of patient experience, chair-side time, accuracy of dental arch measurements and costs of acquisition of dental models

AU - Glisic, Olja

AU - Hoejbjerre, Louise

AU - Sonnesen, Liselotte

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - Objective: To compare patient experience, chairside time, dental arch distances, and costs of dental models derived from intraoral scans and alginate impressions in pre-orthodontic children and young adolescents. Materials and Methods: Fifty-nine children and young adolescents (9–15 years, mean: 12.70 years) had an intraoral scan and an alginate impression prior to orthodontic treatment. During the procedures, chairside time was registered in minutes and patient experience was assessed by a Visual Analogue Scale questionnaire. Four maxillary dental arch distances were measured on digital models, on plaster casts, and directly in the mouth (intraoral). The cost of each procedure was presented graphically. Differences between the two procedures were tested by paired t-test and general linear model. Results: Patient experience was statistically better during intraoral scan compared with alginate impression regarding comfort, gag reflex, breathing, smell/sound, taste/vibration, and all statements concerning anxiety (P, .05). No significant difference in chairside time between the two procedures was found. No statistically significant differences in dental arch distances between digital models and plaster casts were found, but dental arch distances measured intraorally differed significantly from both digital models and plaster casts (P, .05). Cost calculation showed that the digital procedure was 10.7 times more expensive than the conventional procedure initially and, that after 3.6 years, the two procedures were equal in cost. Conclusions: Children preferred intraoral scan rather than alginate impression. Chairside time was equal for the two procedures as were the measurements of maxillary dental arch distances. The two procedures were equal in cost at 3.6 years.

AB - Objective: To compare patient experience, chairside time, dental arch distances, and costs of dental models derived from intraoral scans and alginate impressions in pre-orthodontic children and young adolescents. Materials and Methods: Fifty-nine children and young adolescents (9–15 years, mean: 12.70 years) had an intraoral scan and an alginate impression prior to orthodontic treatment. During the procedures, chairside time was registered in minutes and patient experience was assessed by a Visual Analogue Scale questionnaire. Four maxillary dental arch distances were measured on digital models, on plaster casts, and directly in the mouth (intraoral). The cost of each procedure was presented graphically. Differences between the two procedures were tested by paired t-test and general linear model. Results: Patient experience was statistically better during intraoral scan compared with alginate impression regarding comfort, gag reflex, breathing, smell/sound, taste/vibration, and all statements concerning anxiety (P, .05). No significant difference in chairside time between the two procedures was found. No statistically significant differences in dental arch distances between digital models and plaster casts were found, but dental arch distances measured intraorally differed significantly from both digital models and plaster casts (P, .05). Cost calculation showed that the digital procedure was 10.7 times more expensive than the conventional procedure initially and, that after 3.6 years, the two procedures were equal in cost. Conclusions: Children preferred intraoral scan rather than alginate impression. Chairside time was equal for the two procedures as were the measurements of maxillary dental arch distances. The two procedures were equal in cost at 3.6 years.

KW - Children

KW - Intraoral scan

KW - Alginate impression

KW - Experience

KW - Chairside time

KW - Cost calculation

U2 - 10.2319/020619-84.1

DO - 10.2319/020619-84.1

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 31259615

SN - 0003-3219

VL - 89

SP - 868

EP - 875

JO - Angle Orthodontist

JF - Angle Orthodontist

IS - 6

ER -