ArticleMedicine and pharmacy reports2026
Digital workflow integration and standardized communication protocols in prosthetic dentistry: a multicenter cross-sectional study on innovation impact and interdisciplinary collaboration.
Article in Medicine and pharmacy reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The digitalization of prosthetic dentistry - encompassing CAD/CAM fabrication, intraoral scanning, and digital prescription platforms - represents one of the most transformative biotechnological shifts in contemporary dental practice. Despite these advances, the transition from analog to digital communication workflows remains incomplete in many clinical settings, and the relationship between communication modality, error frequency, and professional satisfaction has not been quantified in a multicenter international sample. This study investigates whether the adoption of structured digital and standardized communication protocols translates into measurable improvements in interdisciplinary collaboration outcomes. Methods: An exploratory cross-sectional online survey was distributed via professional social media groups and institutional networks to dentists and dental technicians in five countries (Germany, Romania, France, Israel, United States). The questionnaire addressed communication modality, error frequency, satisfaction (1-10 scale), and turnaround time. Descriptive statistics and exploratory group comparisons (independent-samples t-test, chi-square) were applied; effect sizes (Cohen's d) are reported where applicable. Given the achieved sample (n=162), all analyses are exploratory and hypothesis-generating. Results: Verbal instructions were the most frequently used modality and were associated with the highest error rate (79% of technicians reported missing or incorrect information). Standardized work-authorization forms yielded the highest satisfaction scores (dentists 8.4/10, n=60; technicians 6.8/10, n=70) yet were incompletely filled in 76% of cases. Non-standard written requests generated the greatest frustration (44% of technicians cited poor communication). Turnaround time was shorter for in-house technicians (mean 5.17 days, SD=1.8) than external laboratories (mean 7.64 days, SD=2.3), though the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.08, d=0.24). Conclusions: Structured communication protocols - particularly standardized digital prescriptions - are associated with lower interdisciplinary error rates and higher professional satisfaction in prosthetic workflows. These pilot findings support accelerated adoption of digital workflow solutions as a pragmatic, low-cost innovation with measurable clinical and organizational impact. Integration of CAD/CAM-compatible communication standards into dental education and practice guidelines is recommended to bridge the persistent gap between technological capability and everyday clinical use.
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.