Comparison of conventional and digital impression techniques in children up to 9 years: a multicentric crossover study on time, preference, and comfort in relation to gag reflex and dental fear

Authors:

ABSTRACT

Aim

Digital applications are transforming dental practice, from diagnosis to treatment planning. In this context, digital impression-taking is becoming an increasingly prevalent method. This study aimed to evaluate the comfort and efficiency of digital impression-taking compared to classic alginate impressions. Additionally, the study explored the correlation between comfort, dental fear, and the gag reflex.

Methods

Means and standard deviations were used to describe the data, and paired t-tests compared time and comfort between impression methods. Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation coefficients analysed relationships between comfort, dental fear, and the gag reflex. A nonparametric Spearman model further examined the association between discomfort levels in both techniques.

Results

The average total time required to complete the digital scanning procedure was 128.0 ± 20.9 seconds. Significant differences were observed across all comfort parameters (p < 0.001), with the intraoral scanner being preferred. A strong correlation was identified between operator-observed comfort during conventional impressions and the child’s level of dental fear (r = 0.71).

Conclusion

Digital impressions in young paediatric patients are more time-efficient and preferred over classic alginate impressions. Both observed and self-reported comfort are greater with digital impressions, and patient discomfort is strongly correlated with dental fear.

Study Design

This multicentric, randomised, crossover, observational study included 107 patients with a mean age of 7.33 ± 1.42 years. Digital impression-taking and classic alginate impressions - for both dental arches and bite registration - were compared across two sessions held at two-week intervals. The study also examined self-reported dental fear, self-reported gagging, and objective gagging assessments.

PLUMX METRICS