Patient preference and clinical working time between digital scanning and conventional impression making for implant-supported prostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: The technology behind optical scanners has greatly improved recently, making their dental application advantageous. While their accuracy is now comparable with that of conventional impression materials, whether these techniques have other advantages is unclear.PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether digital scanning for implant-supported restorations is more time-efficient and convenient for the patient.MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was conducted on September 23, 2020 using 4 different databases (Medline, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus) searching for clinical studies that compared the time needed and/or patient perceptions between those who had undergone the digital scanning procedure and those who had undergone conventional impression making.RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria for qualitative and quantitative analysis. Outcome variables were measured as standard mean differences (SMDs) by following a fixed-effects model or random-effects model (in the case of high heterogeneity). Digital scanning was more time-efficient and was preferred by patients for all 4 analyzed outcomes (comfort, anxiety, nausea, time perception).CONCLUSIONS: Digital scanning was found to be more time-efficient and convenient than conventional impression making for implant-supported restorations. Additional randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the findings of this review.