Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
68 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2024-11-01
2025-02-15
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Previous studies comparing conventional and digital impression techniques suggest that patients generally prefer digital scanning due to improved comfort and reduced procedural time. However, research on pediatric patients remains limited, with most studies focusing on general performance rather than specific patient experiences. Given the unique anatomical and psychological characteristics of children, a comprehensive evaluation of comfort perception in different intraoral scanners is necessary.
This study aims to assess the effects of two different intraoral scanners on pediatric patients' comfort perception. It is designed as a single-center, randomized controlled crossover study, approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Dentistry at Batman University. A total of 68 children meeting the inclusion criteria were recruited and randomly assigned to undergo intraoral scanning with two different devices (IteroTM and 3ShapeTM) at separate visits. Comfort levels were assessed using the Animale Emoji Scale (AES), a validated tool for measuring children's emotional responses to procedures.
By comparing the comfort perception of different intraoral scanners in pediatric patients, this study aims to provide evidence-based guidance for clinicians in selecting the most patient-friendly digital impression techniques, ultimately improving patient experience and clinical workflow in pediatric dentistry.
To prevent bias during the procedure, the intraoral scan was performed using either the Itero™ or 3Shape™ device, determined by simple randomization. Since the sample consisted of consecutive cases, random selection was performed by coin toss.
At the first appointment, parents or legal guardians were informed about the study, a consent form was provided, and they were informed that they would be contacted again if they wished to participate. The first scan was performed using the Itero Element 2D (Align Technology, San Jose, CA, USA) device.
The second appointment was scheduled 7 to 30 days after the initial appointment to avoid affecting children's comfort, in accordance with previous studies. The second scan was planned using the 3Shape Trios 3 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) device.
All intraoral scans were performed by the principal investigator of the study. According to the manufacturer's instructions, the patient was scanned in a supine position following the same sequence (lower jaw, upper jaw, and bite registration).
To increase the reliability of the results, all measurements were taken by a single experienced researcher who took at least 100 measurements with both scanning devices. To ensure standardization, all patients were positioned at 11 o'clock relative to the unit and the scanning device was positioned at 1 o'clock for all scans.
The primary outcome of the study was patient comfort. Participants' comfort was measured using the Animated Emoji Scale (AES) based on questions prepared during the procedure. Children were asked to select the face that best reflected their feelings after the procedure (Figure 1). For younger children, the AES scale was completed under the supervision of the operator and with guiding questions. The AES scale includes 6 different facial expressions ranging from "no pain" to "worst pain," and each face is scored from 0-2-4-6-8-10. These measurements were always taken by the same observer.
Sample size was calculated using G\*Power, and data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS 21® Software (Armonk, NY, USA). The normality of the data was evaluated using the Shapiro-Wilk's and/or Kolmogorov Smirnov tests. The significance level was set at p\<0.05. In case of deviation from the normal distribution, differences between groups were examined using the Mann Whitney U and Kruskal Wallis-H tests. In case of a significant difference in the Kruskal Wallis-H test, a Post-Hoc multiple comparison test was applied. Differences between two dependent variables were analyzed using the Wilcoxon test.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Comparative Evaluation of Pediatric Patient Comfort, Time, and Preference Between Digital Scans and Rubber Base Impressions. Crossover Study Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT06833385
Comparing Dental Impression Methods for Children
NCT06422611
Digital Versus Conventional Impression on Discomfort and Dental Anxiety Among Preschoolers
NCT06623851
A Comparison Of Dental Arch Analysis Using 3d Digital Scanning Versus Conventional Methods In Children
NCT07179146
The Acceptability of Digital Impression Compared to Conventional Technique in Children
NCT07002138
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Digital scanner group
It consists of children whose digital measurements were taken with the Itero scanner in the first appointment and with the 3Shape scanner in the second appointment.
Intraoral Scanners
Intraoral scanners for pediatric patients
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Intraoral Scanners
Intraoral scanners for pediatric patients
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
8 Years
12 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Batman University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Nursezen Kavasoglu
Assistant Professor Dr.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Dental In Oral and Dental Health Polyclinic
Diyarbakır, , Turkey (Türkiye)
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NK01
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.