Observational analysis compares impression techniques for 100 patients, highlighting improved accuracy and comfort with digital methods.
Dental implant success is closely linked to the precision of the impression technique used. The purpose of this research was to compare digital vs. Conventional impression techniques for dental implants. A total of 100 patients were randomly assigned to either the digital group or the conventional group, with 50 individuals in each. Impression accuracy was assessed using deviation analysis, patient comfort was scored on a visual analog scale, and time efficiency was recorded in minutes. Digital impression techniques provide a clear advantage over conventional methods in terms of precision, patient experience, and clinical efficiency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jaiswal et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: