Time and Cost Efficiency of Digital vs Conventional Dental Casts: A Prospective Comparative Study

Background and objectives: Digital impression techniques have progressively replaced conventional plaster-based dental casts in modern prosthodontic and restorative practice.However, the comparative time and cost profiles of intraoral scanning (IOS), desktop scanning (DS), and conventional impression-based methods (CM) remain inadequately characterized in the literature.This study aimed to quantitatively compare the time efficiency and direct cost parameters of digital casts obtained by IOS, DS of conventional impressions/casts, and the conventional plaster cast method.Materials and methods: A prospective comparative study enrolled 90 patients (30 per group) requiring full-arch diagnostic casts.Group I received IOS (iTero Element 5D), group II underwent conventional polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impressions followed by DS (3Shape D2000), and group III had conventional plaster casts.Time was measured in five standardized phases.Direct material and equipment amortization costs were calculated per patient.Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) test (p < 0.05).Results: Total mean procedural time was significantly lowest for IOS (9.4 ± 1.0 min) compared to DS (23.6 ± 1.9 min) and CM (31.8 ± 2.8 min) (p < 0.001).Per-patient direct cost was highest for IOS (₹1,850 ± 120) due to equipment amortization, followed by DS (₹960 ± 90) and CM (₹610 ± 70).Patient discomfort scores were significantly lower in IOS (p < 0.001).Storage costs favored digital methods substantially.Conclusion: Intraoral scanning offers the greatest time efficiency and patient comfort but carries the highest per-case direct cost.Desktop scanning provides an intermediate cost-effective option when existing infrastructure is utilized.Over a projected case volume of 200 cases/ year, IOS reaches cost parity with DS and approaches CM cost-equivalence within 3 years, supporting long-term investment in digital workflows.Clinical significance: The adoption of intraoral and DS technologies can meaningfully streamline the diagnostic and treatment planning workflow in contemporary dental practice by reducing chair time and laboratory turnaround while maintaining dimensional accuracy.These insights can guide clinicians and dental institutions in making evidence-based decisions regarding digital workflow adoption, ultimately optimizing resource allocation and elevating the standard of care delivered.