Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBilir, Halenur
dc.contributor.authorAygüzen, Ceren
dc.date.accessioned2020-09-11T06:29:29Z
dc.date.available2020-09-11T06:29:29Z
dc.date.issued2020en_US
dc.identifier.citationBilir, H. ve Aygüzen, C. (2020). Comparison of digital and conventional impression methods by preclinical students: Efficiency and future expectations. Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry, 10(4), 402-409. https://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_330_18en_US
dc.identifier.issn2231-0762
dc.identifier.issn2250-1002
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_330_18
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/5780
dc.description.abstractAims and Objectives: The purpose of this study is to compare digital and conventional impression methods by preclinical students in terms of time and ease and to evaluate their preferences and future expectations.Materials and Methods: Twenty volunteered, 2nd year preclinical students (11 females and 9 males) participated in this study. Students took digital and conventional impressions of the left lower first molar which was made full ceramic crown preparation and opposite full arch from a typodont model (Frasaco, Frasaco GmbH, Tettnang, Germany). They used intraoral scanner (CEREC Omnicam, Sirona Dental GmbH, Bensheim, Germany) for digital impression and also used additional type (Express XT Penta H, 3M ESPE, Seefeld, Germany) and condensation type (Zetaplus, Zhermack SpA, Badia Polesine, Italy) silicones for conventional impression. Their taking impression time was measured. Before taking impression and after taking impression, two kinds of questionnaires were conducted to students about their preference, ease of impression methods, and their future expectations. Statistical analysis was performed by IBM SPSS 23 and Excel 2010 version. Differences between conventional and digital impression in terms of time were analyzed by student's-t paired test and effect of gender was analyzed by students's-t independent test.Results: There were statistically significant differences between digital and conventional impression methods in terms of taking impression and total impression time (P < 0.001). But there wasn't any statistically significant difference between two methods in terms of preparation time. About 85% of students preferred the digital impression method and also 85% of students found that the digital impression method was easy. 95% of students expected to find intraoral scanner in the clinic where working first time.Conclusions: As a result of this study, it has been seen that the students preferred the digital impression method to the conventional impression method and found that the digital impression method was easier.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherWolters Kluwer Medknow Publicationsen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/*
dc.subjectComputer-Aided Design/Computer-Aided Manufacturingen_US
dc.subjectConventional Impressionen_US
dc.subjectDigital Impressionen_US
dc.subjectExperience of Dental Studentsen_US
dc.subjectImpression Methodsen_US
dc.titleComparison of digital and conventional impression methods by preclinical students: Efficiency and future expectationsen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.relation.journalJournal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistryen_US
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Protetik Diş Tedavisi Ana Bilim Dalıen_US
dc.authorid0000-0002-6576-6029en_US
dc.identifier.volume10en_US
dc.identifier.issue4en_US
dc.identifier.startpage402en_US
dc.identifier.endpage409en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_330_18en_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess