What to Prefer in Patients with Multibracket Appliances? Digital vs. Conventional Full-Arch Impressions—A Reference Aid-Based In Vivo Study

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the transfer accuracy and required time for digital full-arch impressions obtained from intraoral scanners (IOSs) versus conventional alginate impressions (CAIs) in patients with multibracket appliances (MBA). Thirty patients with buccal MBAs (metal brackets, archwire removed) were examined using an established reference aid method. Impression-taking using four IOSs (Primescan, Trios 4, Medit i700, Emerald S) and one CAI with subsequent plaster casting were conducted. One-hundred-twenty (n = 30 × 4) scans were analyzed with 3D software (GOM Inspect) and 30 (n = 30 × 1) casts were assessed using a coordinate measurement machine. Six distances and six angles were measured and compared to the reference aid values (ANOVA; p p p < 0.001) less time was necessary for all IOSs in comparison to CAIs plus plaster casting.

Keywords

• full-arch impression
• multibracket appliance
• intraoral scanner
• digital dentistry
• alginate
• accuracy