
doi: 10.1002/jdd.13467
pmid: 38361491
AbstractPurpose/objectivesThe study aimed to assess the applicability of digital intraoral scanning in dental hygiene education and compare the quality, efficiency, and ease of use to conventional impression techniques.MethodsTwenty‐eight first‐year dental hygiene students (DH1) at UTHealth Houston School of Dentistry (UTSD) participated in this 2022 study. Each student participated in two 4‐h lab sessions. Students took traditional alginate impressions and digital intraoral scans using Planmeca Romexis on standardized teeth during the first and second sessions. Both techniques were assessed by faculty for quality and efficiency using a standardized rubric. Participants completed a post‐survey providing insight into their perceptions of both techniques and ease of use.ResultsThe study had 100% participation in the lab sessions and survey responses (N = 28). The results showed digital scanning produced a statistically higher quality product than conventional alginate impressions (p = 0.023). The study found no statistical difference in the efficiency between the two methods. The majority of students (82%) agreed that digital intraoral scanning was easy to use (p = 0.001), and 89% agreed they would use digital intraoral scanning in clinical courses to help with patient care (p = 0.03).ConclusionIn this study, dental hygiene students with limited clinical experience learned new technology and used it to produce quality impressions compared to the conventional technique, indicating the value of introducing digital dentistry early in dental hygiene education.
Dental Impression Technique, Humans, Dental Hygienists, Education, Dental
Dental Impression Technique, Humans, Dental Hygienists, Education, Dental
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 2 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
