Dental Impressions
Conditions
Keywords
dental impression, digital intraoral scanner, alginate, children
Brief summary
The goal of this crossover study is to compare children's perceptions and preferences regarding digital and conventional impression techniques in the 5- to 11-year-old age group. The main questions it aims to answer are * Which impression methods do kids prefer? * What influences kids' perception of impression methods? Dental impressions will be obtained using both the conventional alginate impression (CAI) (Cavex ColorChange; Cavex Holland BV, Haarlem, the Netherlands) and digital intraoral scanning procedure (DIS) (3Shape TRIOS Color, 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). After each procedure, patients will score their perceptions using a Modified Impression Perception Test, a 5-point Likert scale, for gag reflex, queasiness, difficulty breathing, uncomfortable feeling, pain perception, chairside time, and stress levels. Dental anxiety will be assessed using the Visual Anxiety Scale (1-10). Children will also be asked about their preferences and reasons in one or two sentences. Content analysis will be performed on answers to open-ended questions. Statistical analysis will be done using Fisher's Exact test.
Interventions
Alginate impressions were obtained with an irreversible hydrocolloid impression material (Cavex Impressional; Cavex Holland, Haarlem, The Netherlands) and standard plastic trays. For each impression, the time required to mix the material and complete a full-mouth (maxillary and mandibular arches) impression was recorded.
DEVICEAlginate Impression
Alginate impressions were obtained with an irreversible hydrocolloid impression material (Cavex Impressional; Cavex Holland, Haarlem, The Netherlands) and standard plastic trays. For each impression, the time required to mix the material and complete a full-mouth (maxillary and mandibular arches) impression was recorded.
Sponsors
Uşak University
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
5 Years to 11 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* No prior exposure to either digital or conventional impression techniques * Absence of temporomandibular joint disorders and periodontal disease * Cleft lip and/or palate, or other significant craniofacial anomalies * No current use of psychiatric or neuropathic medications
Exclusion criteria
* Individuals with a known history of dental anxiety or a pronounced gag reflex
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Modified Children Perception test | one year | After the each impression proscedure, to evaluate children's perspectives on the impression techniques, the perception questionnaire used in Burhardt's study was adapted for this research.5 The questionnaire was translated into Turkish to ensure cultural and linguistic appropriateness. The translated version underwent content validation through expert review to ensure its relevance and appropriateness for the target population. The perception questionnaire used in this study aimed to measure gag reflex, queasiness, difficulty to breathe, discomfort, time perception, stress, pain. Accordingly, 8 questions with 5-point Likert scale responses ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree were included (Figure-1). Additionally, the Visual Anxiety Scale (VAS) was employed to measure overall discomfort. For the VAS results, children were asked to score their perceived discomfort on a scale from 0 (no discomfort) to 10 (extreme discomfort). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Responses to open-ended questions | one year | After completing both of the impression proscedure, children were asked two questions regarding their preference: one closed-ended question Which method did you prefer? and one open-ended follow-up question Why did you prefer this method?. The latter was used for thematic content analysis. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed