SynthesisClinical oral investigations2021
Intraoral scanning reduces procedure time and improves patient comfort in fixed prosthodontics and implant dentistry: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Clinical oral investigations, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 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
67 citing papers in PubMed, 175 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced efficacy of oral hygiene instructions during motivational interviewing using intraoral scanner technology: a randomized clinical trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Clinical outcome of translucent zirconia and metal-ceramic posterior crowns in a digital workflow: A 5-year prospective randomized clinical trial.Journal of prosthodontics : official journal of the American College of Prosthodontists · 2025Trial
- Digital Fabrication of Complete Dentures Using Multifunctional Custom Trays: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2026Article
- Patient Comfort With Smartphone-Based and Intraoral Camera Imaging in Teledentistry: Observational Cross-Sectional Study.Online journal of public health informatics · 2026Article
- In Vivo Complete Arch Implant Impressions: Comparison of the Linear Precision of Digital and Conventional Techniques.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Influence of Scan Body Geometry, Implant Angulation, and Interimplant Distance on the Accuracy of Maxillary Full-Arch Digital Implant Scans: An In Vitro Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2026Article
- Article
- The Trueness between Conventional Impression and Different Intraoral Scanners for All-on-4 Implants: An In vitro Comparative Study.European journal of dentistry · 2026Article
- Accuracy of digitally fabricated partial coverage ceramic restorations using conventional impression and intraoral scanners.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Digital impression accuracy of a novel scannable healing abutment: an in vitro study with three intraoral scanners.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- PEEK Intraoral Scan Bodies-A Scoping Review.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Effect of ambient light level on scanning accuracy and duration of intraoral scanners: a clinical evaluation.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Advances in 3D Printing for Removable Prosthetics-Insights and Perspectives.Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.] · 2026Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Conventional and Digital Workflow Impressions for Implant-Supported Restorations.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Accuracy of digital impressions captured by an intraoral scanner in a partially edentulous mandible.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Future of dental education: digitalization, career outlook, and perspectives of dental students and early-career dentists.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Clinical Evaluation of Intraoral, In-Lab Scanners and PVS Impression Materials Using STL Superimposition.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- [Comparative study on the accuracy of extraoral scanning versus intraoral scanning in digital impressions for implant restoration in edentulous jaws].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2025Article
- Digital Workflows in Prosthodontics.Australian dental journal · 2025Review
- Accuracy and patient satisfaction of intraoral scanner in preschool-aged children: a combined in vivo and in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate whether intraoral scanning (IOS) is able to reduce working time and improve patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) compared to conventional impression (CI) techniques, taking into account the size of the scanned area. The secondary aim was to verify the effectiveness of IOS procedures based on available prosthodontic outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsElectronic and manual literature searches were performed to collect evidence concerning the outcomes of IOS and CI performed during the treatment of partially and complete edentulous patients for tooth- or implant-supported restorations. Qualitative analysis was conducted to evaluate the time efficiency and PROMs produced by the two different techniques. Clinical prosthodontic outcomes were analyzed among the included studies when available.
resultsSeventeen studies (9 randomized controlled trials and 8 prospective clinical studies) were selected for qualitative synthesis. The 17 included studies provided data from 430 IOS and 370 CI performed in 437 patients. A total of 7 different IOS systems and their various updated versions were used for digital impressions. The results demonstrated that IOS was overall faster than CI independent of whether quadrant or complete-arch scanning was utilized, regardless of the nature of the restoration (tooth or implant supported). IOS was generally preferred over CI regardless of the size of the scanned area and nature of the restoration (tooth- or implant-supported). Similar prosthodontic outcomes were reported for workflows implementing CI and IOS.
conclusionsWithin the limitations of this systematic review, IOS is faster than CI, independent of whether a quadrant or complete arch scan is conducted. IOS can improve the patient experience measured by overall preference and comfort and is able to provide reliable prosthodontic outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Reduced procedure working time associated with the use of IOS can improve clinical efficiency and the patient experience during impression procedures. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an essential component of evidence-based dental practice as they allow the evaluation of therapeutic modalities from the perspective of the patient. IOS is generally preferred by patients over conventional impressions.
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.