The Acceptability of Digital Impression Compared to Conventional Technique in Children
NCT ID: NCT07002138
Last Updated: 2025-06-03
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
40 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2023-11-01
2024-05-17
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Digital Versus Conventional Impression on Discomfort and Dental Anxiety Among Preschoolers
NCT06623851
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
Atraumatic Versus Silver-Modified Atraumatic Restorative Treatment in Primary Molars
NCT07023939
A Clinical and Microbiological Assessment of the Efficacy of Chemo-mechanical Caries Removal Versus Conventional Caries Removal Methods in Children: Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial
NCT06531148
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This study will be conducted at the Pediatric Dentistry Department of Beirut Arab University over a four-month period and will involve 40 pediatric patients who require dental impressions for fixed or removable appliances. A 1:1 randomization process will assign participants to one of two sequences: Group 1 will receive a digital impression first, followed by a conventional impression after a 14-21 day washout period; Group 2 will receive the procedures in reverse order. All procedures will be performed by a single calibrated operator.
Digital impressions will be made using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner, which allows 3D image acquisition without physical materials or trays. The scanning process includes drying the teeth and capturing occlusal, lingual, and buccal surfaces. Conventional impressions will be obtained using Hydrogum 5 alginate, involving tray selection, alginate mixing, and taking maxillary and mandibular impressions, followed by disinfection.
To assess acceptability and experience, several outcome measures will be recorded. Patient comfort and specific sensory responses will be measured using a Visual Analog Scale (VAS), where children will rate domains such as general feeling, breathing difficulty, taste or smell discomfort, thermal discomfort (heat/cold), gag reflex, and pain. Operator-assessed anxiety levels will be scored using the Venham's Clinical Anxiety Scale (VCAS), ranging from 0 (no anxiety) to 5 (severe anxiety). Total procedure time will be recorded using a digital stopwatch, beginning at tray or scanner insertion and ending at procedure completion. After both procedures, a structured comparative questionnaire will be administered to children, their parents, and the operator to assess perceived comfort, ease, duration, and preference.
Additionally, the operator's subjective perception of difficulty, applicability, and preference for each method will be documented. Intra-examiner reliability for digital scanning will be evaluated using repeated scans of 10 cases at a 48-hour interval, with agreement assessed via Cohen's Kappa statistic.
Statistical analysis will be conducted using SPSS version 26. Normality testing will guide the use of parametric or non-parametric tests (e.g., paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test), with a significance level set at α = 0.05. Descriptive statistics will be presented for baseline demographic data.
The study has been approved by the Ethics Committee of Beirut Arab University (Protocol ID: 2023-H-0139-D-M-0578). Informed consent will be obtained from parents or legal guardians before participation, and confidentiality will be strictly maintained. Participants will not incur costs or receive compensation.
By comparing these two impression methods in terms of comfort, anxiety, and feasibility, this study aims to generate original data relevant to pediatric dentistry and digital workflows. The findings may inform best practices and encourage the adoption of child-friendly technologies in clinical dental care.
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.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
OTHER
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Sequence A: Conventional First, then Digital
Participants in this group receive a conventional alginate impression first (Hydrogum 5, Zhermack), followed by a digital intraoral scan (medit i700) (after a 14-21 day washout period).
Digital Dental Impression
Digital dental impressions were performed using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner (Medit, Seoul, South Korea). The scanner utilizes 3D-in-motion video technology with UV-C and LED light sources and adaptive anti-fogging. Scans were taken of both upper and lower arches following manufacturer-recommended protocols. Two tip sizes were used (normal and small), and scanning included occlusal, lingual, and buccal surfaces. Moisture control was maintained with cheek retractors and saliva ejectors. Impression time was recorded using a chronometer. This procedure was used to evaluate patient comfort, anxiety, and preference.
Conventional Dental Impression
Conventional impressions were taken using extra-fast setting flavored alginate (Hydrogum 5, Zhermack SpA, Italy) for both upper and lower arches. The impression material was manually mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and applied using standard perforated plastic trays suitable for pediatric arches. Children were seated upright, and the impression sequence followed lower arch first, then upper arch. Comfort was evaluated using VAS scores and anxiety using the Venham Clinical Anxiety Scale (VCAS). The procedure was timed with a chronometer.
Sequence B: Digital First, then Conventional
Participants in this group receive a digital intraoral scan first (medit i700), followed by a conventional alginate impression (Hydrogum 5, Zhermack) after a 14-21 day washout period.
Digital Dental Impression
Digital dental impressions were performed using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner (Medit, Seoul, South Korea). The scanner utilizes 3D-in-motion video technology with UV-C and LED light sources and adaptive anti-fogging. Scans were taken of both upper and lower arches following manufacturer-recommended protocols. Two tip sizes were used (normal and small), and scanning included occlusal, lingual, and buccal surfaces. Moisture control was maintained with cheek retractors and saliva ejectors. Impression time was recorded using a chronometer. This procedure was used to evaluate patient comfort, anxiety, and preference.
Conventional Dental Impression
Conventional impressions were taken using extra-fast setting flavored alginate (Hydrogum 5, Zhermack SpA, Italy) for both upper and lower arches. The impression material was manually mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and applied using standard perforated plastic trays suitable for pediatric arches. Children were seated upright, and the impression sequence followed lower arch first, then upper arch. Comfort was evaluated using VAS scores and anxiety using the Venham Clinical Anxiety Scale (VCAS). The procedure was timed with a chronometer.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Digital Dental Impression
Digital dental impressions were performed using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner (Medit, Seoul, South Korea). The scanner utilizes 3D-in-motion video technology with UV-C and LED light sources and adaptive anti-fogging. Scans were taken of both upper and lower arches following manufacturer-recommended protocols. Two tip sizes were used (normal and small), and scanning included occlusal, lingual, and buccal surfaces. Moisture control was maintained with cheek retractors and saliva ejectors. Impression time was recorded using a chronometer. This procedure was used to evaluate patient comfort, anxiety, and preference.
Conventional Dental Impression
Conventional impressions were taken using extra-fast setting flavored alginate (Hydrogum 5, Zhermack SpA, Italy) for both upper and lower arches. The impression material was manually mixed according to the manufacturer's instructions and applied using standard perforated plastic trays suitable for pediatric arches. Children were seated upright, and the impression sequence followed lower arch first, then upper arch. Comfort was evaluated using VAS scores and anxiety using the Venham Clinical Anxiety Scale (VCAS). The procedure was timed with a chronometer.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* In need for the fabrication of fixed or removable appliance
* Having gagging problem based on the Classification of Gagging Problem scale starting from G1 to G5. (Saita et al., 2013) Where G1 is Normal Gagging: Normal gagging but not desensitized (controlled by the patient). The patient can withstand a full mouth examination with a dental mirror and a basic periodontal examination G2 is Mild gagging : Gagging when probe was used in a basic periodontal examination G3 is Moderate gagging: Gagging when examining molar teeth with a mirror G4 is Severe gagging: Gagging when examination of anterior teeth with a mirror G5 is Very severe gagging: Gagging at the moment when the dental mirror is inserted
Exclusion Criteria
* Having any systemic diseases or mental disorders.
6 Years
11 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Beirut Arab University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Hind Tabbal
Clinical Professor
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Associate Professor Ahmad Tarabaih, Associate Professor Ahmad
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Beirut Arab University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
The Pediatric Dental clinics of the Faculty of Dentistry at Beirut Arab University
Beirut, , Lebanon
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.
2023-H-0139-D-M-0578
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.