None listed
Conditions
Brief summary
This clinical study compares digital intraoral scanning (Cameo intraoral scanner) and conventional alginate impressions in pediatric dental patients. The main outcomes include total procedure time, operator difficulty, child comfort (including gag reflex, crying, and breathing difficulty), and final preference reported by the child and parent. Thirty-six children aged 6–9 years were included at the Pediatric Dentistry Department, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Syria. Both techniques were performed in the same visit for each child, and all outcomes were recorded immediately. This trial was retrospectively registered after data collection due to administrative reasons.
Interventions
All participating children will receive two full-arch impressions as part of the study, conducted in two separate appointments.
Digital impressions will be obtained using a Cameo intraoral scanner, operated by a trained pediatric dentist according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Participants will be seated in a dental chair, and standardized scanning protocols will be followed to acquire maxillary and mandibular digital scans.
Conventional impressions will be taken using standard stock tra
All participating children will receive two full-arch impressions as part of the study, conducted in two separate appointments. Digital impressions will be obtained using a Cameo intraoral scanner, operated by a trained pediatric dentist according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Participants will be seated in a dental chair, and standardized scanning protocols will be followed to acquire maxillary and mandibular digital scans. Conventional impressions will be taken using standard stock trays and alginate impression material following routine pediatric dental clinical procedures. The order of impression techniques (digital or conventional) will be randomized using a simple randomization method to minimize order-related bias. A washout period of at least 14 days will be observed between the two impression techniques to reduce potential carryover effects. Adherence to the intervention will be ensured through direct operator supervision and standardized clinical protocols throughout all procedures.
Sponsors
Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University
Study design
Allocation
Randomised controlled trial
Intervention model
Crossover
Primary purpose
Diagnosis
Masking
Open (masking not used)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Age
6 Years to 9 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
• Children aged 6 to 9 years. • Cooperative behavior adequate for dental procedures (Frankl 3 or 4). • Requiring maxillary and mandibular impressions for diagnostic or treatment planning purposes (e.g. space maintainer, orthodontic assessment). • Signed parental consent and child verbal assent.
Exclusion criteria
• Severe gag reflex preventing impression taking. • Children with respiratory problems or special medical conditions that may interfere with safe impression taking (e.g. uncontrolled asthma, airway issues). • Uncooperative behavior (Frankl 1 or 2). • Acute pain or dental emergency on the day of recording.
Outcome results
None listed