ArticleJournal of dental education2026
Quantitative and Color-Coded Assessment of Crown Preparation Using a 3D-Printed Channel and Hole Guide: A Pilot Comparison With Conventional Guides.
Article in Journal of dental education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Quantitative and Color-Coded Assessment of Crown Preparation Using a 3D-Printed Channel and Hole Guide: A Pilot Comparison With Conventional Guides.Journal of dental education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCrown preparation is a fundamental procedure in restorative dentistry. This study aimed to evaluate quantitative and color-coded assessment of tooth reduction using various 3D-printed tooth reduction guides in comparison to conventional guiding methods during crown preparation.
methodsTwelve prosthodontic residents from a single prosthodontic graduate program (first year: n = 6; second year: n = 6) participated in this IRB-approved study (Yonsei University Dental Hospital IRB 2-2024-0026). Recruitment was voluntary and the participation rate was 100%. Participants provided informed consent and performed tooth preparations using four guide types: freehand, putty guide, channel guide, and hole guide. Standardized reduction parameters were provided. Maxillary and mandibular models were generated using Medit Model Builder software, and selected teeth (upper left central incisor, lower left first molar, lower right second premolar) were converted into dies. Guides were designed with a uniform 2 mm thickness for stability. The putty guide was fabricated using polyvinylsiloxane, while channel and hole guides were 3D printed. Preparations were performed with a diamond bur, and completed teeth were scanned with an intraoral scanner. Accuracy was assessed by superimposing scans onto original tooth data using 3D inspection software, with under-prepared areas analyzed in detail. Preparation times were recorded.
resultsThe channel guide consistently demonstrated the highest accuracy, with the lowest mean distances in underprepared areas for all teeth. The freehand group showed the greatest variability and the highest mean distances in underprepared regions. Working time analysis showed significant differences among groups; the putty group required the longest time, while the freehand group was the most time-efficient. The channel group demonstrated moderate working times with low variability.
conclusionsThe novel channel-type guide showed potential for improving preparation accuracy. However, underprepared areas in critical regions could compromise restoration durability. While the guides had minimal impact on procedure time, further studies are needed to confirm these findings in a wider clinical context.
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.