ArticleJournal of dental sciences2023
Accuracy of digital impressions for three-unit and four-unit implant supported fixed dental prostheses using a novel device.
Article in Journal of dental sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of different fabrication workflows on the passive fit of screw-retained bar splinting two interforaminal implants: a parallel blinded randomised clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2024Trial
- Materials and Techniques for Splinting Scan Bodies: A Scoping Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Impact of scan body splinting on the accuracy of complete-arch digital implant impressions.Journal of dental sciences · 2025Article
- Effects of inter-implant tooth loss and scan body material on digital impression accuracy: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Comparison of intraoral scanner accuracy before and after calibration: an in vitro study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Effect of an auxiliary device on scanning accuracy for multiple implants: an in vitro comparative study.Head & face medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Efficacy of Artificial Intelligence-Powered Software in Crown Design: An In Vitro Study.International dental journal · 2025Article
- [Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2023Article
- Influence of the implant scan body modifications on trueness of digital impressions.Journal of dental sciences · 2023Article
- Intraoral Scan Accuracy and Time Efficiency in Implant-Supported Fixed Partial Dentures: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2023Review
- Revolutionising dental technologies: a qualitative study on dental technicians' perceptions of Artificial intelligence integration.BMC oral health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/ purpose: Accuracy of digital implant impressions was considered questionable due to the lack of anatomical reference points between implants and the similarities in scan body morphology, which lead to the purpose of this research is to propose a simple and convenient technique to improve the accuracy of scanning. Materials and methods: Four implant analogues (teeth: 15, 17, 24, and 27) were inserted into a stone model of a partially edentulous maxilla; two implants were inserted on each side, creating a three-unit span and a four-unit span. The model was scanned using a 3Shape E4 dental laboratory scanner for reference and a TRIOS 3 intraoral scanner for testing. Each side was scanned 10 times, both with and without the novel device attached to the scan bodies. The trueness and precision of interimplant distances (linear deviations), and interimplant angulations (angle deviations) between the scan bodies were determined using software. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to determine statistical differences between subgroups. Results: Significant differences were discovered in the trueness of angular deviations (-0.20° ± 0.15° vs. -0.01° ± 0.11º) and precision of linear deviations (11.14 ± 6.35 vs. 3.10 ± 2.14 μm) for the four-unit groups. Conclusion: The novel device significantly improved scanning accuracy for a four-unit groups (approximately 22.93 mm) compared to three-unit groups.
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.