Trial reportHead & face medicine2020
Accuracy of intraoral scans in the mixed dentition: a prospective non-randomized comparative clinical trial.
Trial report in Head & face medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral health status and associated factors among rural older adults in China using a 3D intraoral scanner: a population-based cross-sectional study in four provinces.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Survival of direct resin composites versus stainless-steel crowns as coronal restorations following pulpotomy in young permanent first molars: a retrospective cohort study using propensity score-matched analysis.European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry · 2026Article
- Accuracy and patient satisfaction of intraoral scanner in preschool-aged children: a combined in vivo and in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Applicability of intraoral scans for presurgical orthopedic treatment of cleft lip and palate in infants: a prospective non-randomized comparative study.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Comparisons of precision and trueness of digital dental casts produced by desktop scanners and intraoral scanners.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- The accuracy of digital scanners versus conventional impression in patients with cleft lip and palate: A cross-sectional study.The Saudi dental journal · 2024Article
- Trueness comparison of intraoral scans for diverse arch lengths in pediatric dental models.Journal of dental sciences · 2024Article
- Accuracy of Digital Intraoral Scans Three-dimensional Surface Analysis Compared with Plaster Models Dental Measurement in Mixed Dentition.International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry · 2024Article
- Accuracy Analysis of Digital Models from Intraoral Scanners and 3D-Printed Casts in Children and Teenagers.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Accuracy and reliability of mandibular digital model superimposition based on the morphological characteristics of vessels in extraction adult patients.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Trueness of intraoral scanning for different tooth-size arch-length deficiencies.Journal of dental sciences · 2024Article
- CBCT Assessment of Gubernacular Canals on Permanent Tooth Eruption in Down's Syndrome.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- What to Prefer in Patients with Multibracket Appliances? Digital vs. Conventional Full-Arch Impressions-A Reference Aid-Based In Vivo Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Intraoral scanners in children: evaluation of the patient perception, reliability and reproducibility, and chairside time-A systematic review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Influence of marginal incision and Le Fort I osteotomy on periodontal tissues: a prospective longitudinal study.Odontology · 2023Article
- A novel approach for determining instantaneous centers of rotation of the mandible with an intraoral scanner: A preliminary study.PloS one · 2023Article
- The Effect of Scanning Strategy on Intraoral Scanner's Accuracy.Dentistry journal · 2022Article
- In Vivo Accuracy of a New Digital Planning System in Terms of Jaw Relation, Extent of Surgical Movements and the Hierarchy of Stability in Orthognathic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Assessment of Growth Changes in the Width of Dental Arches Caused by Removable Appliances over a Period of 10 Months in Children with Malocclusion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Analysis of the relationship between the surface topography of prepared tooth surfaces and data quality of digital impressions from an intraoral scanner.Journal of dental sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveIn-vivo accuracy of intraoral scans of complete mixed dentitions of patients in active treatment have not yet been investigated. The aim was to test the hypothesis that dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional alginate impressions in the mixed dentition are clinically irrelevant.
methodsTrial design: Prospective non-randomized comparative clinical trial. Based on sample size calculation 44 evaluable mixed dentition jaws of patients in active orthodontic treatment were included. Each patient received an alginate impression following an intraoral scan (TRIOS® Ortho). Plaster cast was fabricated and scanned with an external scanner (ATOS-SO®). Both STL datasets were analyzed with the 3D inspection and mesh processing software GOM Inspect®. Statistical analysis comprised sample size calculation, t-test as well as nonparametric tests.
resultsThe absolute mean difference between digital plaster casts and intraoral scans is 0.022 mm ± 0.027 mm (median 0.015 mm). The obtained measurements are in the range of comparable studies on full arch permanent dentitions. Gender, the size of the jaw represented by the dentition stage and upper respectively lower jaw, as well the malocclusion have no effect on the total deviations between digital plaster casts and intraoral scans. Detectable impression errors were bubbles in fissures and marginal ridges as well as incomplete alginate flow and detachment from the tray. Detectable scanning errors were incomplete distal surface of the most distal molar.
conclusionDimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional alginate impressions in the mixed dentition are clinically irrelevant for orthodontic purposes. In all clinical situations of active treatment in the mixed dentition, the intraoral scans are more detailed and less error-prone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.