Validation of Digital Impressions’ Accuracy Obtained Using Intraoral and Extraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review

11Citations
Citations of this article
37Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: At present, the evidence regarding digital impressions’ accuracy recorded by using digital scanners is lacking. This systematic review aimed to evaluate whether the type of scanning (intraoral/extraoral) affects the Accuracy of Digital Impressions. Method: Two independent reviewers performed a systematic search in the database both electronically and manually (PubMed, Ebsco HOST, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar) for articles published from 1 January 2010 to 1 December 2022. This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42020188765) and followed the PRISMA statement. The question in focus was as follows: Does the type of scanning (intraoral or extraoral) affect the accuracy of digital impression? Results: A total of 449 papers were obtained by searching electronically and manually. In total, 15 complete-text papers qualified for assessment based on eligibility criteria. After reading the full-text articles, five studies were excluded. Ten studies were selected for the qualitative analysis. The qualitative data reported that the accuracy of both types of scanners (intraoral and extraoral) lies within the range of clinical acceptability. Nevertheless, the intraoral scanners seem to be more accurate when compared to the extraoral scanners for a partial arch situation. Conclusions: Scanning type affects the accuracy of the digital impression. Various factors influence the scanning ability. Intraoral scanners seem to be more accurate compared to extraoral scanners for a partial arch situation. More studies comparing the accuracy of the intraoral scanner and extraoral scanner for a complete arch scan and in an in vivo study setting are needed.

References Powered by Scopus

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

53380Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales

31744Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration

12269Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

3D-3D superimposition techniques in personal identification: A ten-year systematic literature review

2Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Accuracy of intraoral scanning using modified scan bodies for complete arch implant-supported fixed prostheses

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Tissue surface adaptation and retention of digital obturator after one year of use

1Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shah, N., Thakur, M., Gill, S., Shetty, O., Alqahtani, N. M., Al-Qarni, M. A., … Chaturvedi, S. (2023, September 1). Validation of Digital Impressions’ Accuracy Obtained Using Intraoral and Extraoral Scanners: A Systematic Review. Journal of Clinical Medicine. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm12185833

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

75%

Professor / Associate Prof. 2

25%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 10

100%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
Blog Mentions: 1
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free