Skip to content

Comparison of Digital Scanning and Conventional Impression Techniques for Multiple Dental Implants

In vivo comparison of accuracy of intraoral scanning strategies with conventional impression technique for multiple implants in single arch - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2026/06/113165
Enrollment
10
Registered
2026-06-30
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2026-08-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: K084- Partial loss of teeth

Interventions

Intervention1: Comparison of intraoral scanning strategies with conventional impression technique: Ten patients with multiple implants in a single arch will undergo conventional open-tray implant impr

Sponsors

Sri sai college of dental surgery
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Patients requiring implant-supported prosthetic rehabilitation. Patients with two or more implants in the same arch. Patients with well osseointegrated implant sites (minimum 6 months post-placement). Presence of adequate interarch space for impression coping and scan body placement. Patients willing to participate in the study. Patients with good oral hygiene and absence of active periodontal disease.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients with limited mouth opening (less than 35 mm interincisal opening). Patients with severe gag reflex interfering with scanning. Patients with uncontrolled systemic diseases (e.g., uncontrolled diabetes). Patients with active oral infections or mucosal lesions in the study area. Implants with mobility or clinical instability. Presence of excessive soft tissue overgrowth preventing proper scan body seating. Patients unable to tolerate conventional impression procedures. Patients not willing to participate in the study.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Accuracy (trueness and precision) of intraoral scans obtained using two scanning strategies with and without reference markers, evaluated by three-dimensional deviation analysis in Geomagic software against the reference dataset obtained from conventional open-tray impressions digitized using the Medit desktop scanner.Timepoint: Immediately after completion of scan acquisition and digital analysis.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
Comparison of the effect of reference markers on the accuracy of intraoral scansTimepoint: baseline;Quantitative assessment of three dimensional deviations between the digital datasets & the reference dataset using Geomagic softwareTimepoint: baseline

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactSAMANVITHA NARAYANA

Sri sai college of dental surgery

kavya.2014@yahoo.co.in9642119922

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Aug 10, 2026