Patient-reported experiences and preferences with intraoral scanners: a systematic review

Author:

Christopoulou Isidora1,Kaklamanos Eleftherios G2ORCID,Makrygiannakis Miltiadis A1ORCID,Bitsanis Ilias1,Tsolakis Apostolos I13

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece

2. Department of Orthodontics, Hamdan Bin Mohammed College of Dental Medicine, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai,United Arab Emirates

3. Department of Orthodontics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH,USA

Abstract

Summary Background Intraoral scanners have become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional impression methods. Although their accuracy and validity have been examined thoroughly, patient-reported information including experiences, preferences, and satisfaction has not yet been investigated in a systematic way. Objective The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the available data and appraise the evidence on patient-reported experiences and preferences following impression taking with intraoral scanners. Search methods Unrestricted search of seven databases (Pubmed, CENTRAL, Cochrane reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and ProQuest) and grey literature were conducted until October 2020. Detailed search strategies were developed for each database. Selection criteria Studies involving individuals of any gender or age, subjected to full arch impression taking with conventional and intraoral scanning methods were eligible for inclusion. Data collection and analysis Following the retrieval and selection of the studies, data extraction was performed. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Results From the initially identified records, nine studies [eight crossover (two of them randomized) and one parallel group] were eventually included in the present systematic review. Randomized studies were shown, overall, to have some concerns regarding bias, whereas the non-randomized studies were found to be at serious risk, mainly because of bias due to confounding. All studies demonstrated some benefit in favour of intraoral scanning compared with conventional techniques. More positive feelings were generally observed with the intraoral scanners regarding smell, taste, sound, vibration, nausea, and queasiness. Overall, comfort assessment mostly favoured digital methods. No differences were found concerning the level of anxiety between the two methods. Among the included studies, time perception was a parameter leading to contradictory results. Limitations These emerge due to the nature and characteristics of the information retrieved from the included studies. The validation of the instruments to capture patient-reported outcomes needs to be further elaborated. Conclusions Intraoral scanners seem to be a promising new asset in the orthodontic office from the perspective of individuals’ experiences and preferences. Nevertheless, to investigate patient-reported outcomes correctly, further high-quality studies are required in the future. Registration Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ayug2/)

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Orthodontics

Reference67 articles.

1. An evidence-based evaluation of three-dimensional scanning technology in orthodontic practice;Harrell;The Journal of Multidisciplinary Care,2018

2. A comparison of the accuracy of intraoral scanners using an intraoral environment simulator;Park;The Journal of Advanced Prosthodontics,2018

3. Orthodontic scanners: what’s available?;Martin;Journal of Orthodontics,2015

4. Is the precision of intraoral digital impressions in orthodontic enough?;Duvert;L’ Orthodontie française,2017

5. The iTero intraoral scanner in Invisalign treatment: a two-year report;Garino;Journal of Clinical Orthodontics: JCO,2014

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3