We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Digital vs Conventional Workflow for Screw-Retained Single-Implant Crowns: A Comparison of Key Considerations.
International Journal of Prosthodontics 2018 November
PURPOSE: To evaluate patient perception and operating time of digital (DW) and conventional (CW) workflows for the rehabilitation of a screw-retained, single-implant crown.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience sample of 10 patients with single implants in posterior sites was recruited for treatment with screw-retained single crowns, fabricated with either a DW or a CW protocol. Operating time and clinical adjusting time were recorded with a stopwatch, and patient preference and self-perception of the esthetic outcome were evaluated with a visual analog scale.
RESULTS: The mean operating time for the DW crowns was 16:21 minutes and for the CW crowns was 28:28 minutes. The mean total adjustment times were 118.1 seconds for the DW protocol and 181.5 seconds for the CW protocol. The mean score regarding self-perception of the esthetic outcome was 73 for DW crowns and 69 for CW crowns; for discomfort, the mean score was 15.5 for DW and 62 for CW.
CONCLUSION: The DW approach resulted in a time reduction for both the impression phase and operative time.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience sample of 10 patients with single implants in posterior sites was recruited for treatment with screw-retained single crowns, fabricated with either a DW or a CW protocol. Operating time and clinical adjusting time were recorded with a stopwatch, and patient preference and self-perception of the esthetic outcome were evaluated with a visual analog scale.
RESULTS: The mean operating time for the DW crowns was 16:21 minutes and for the CW crowns was 28:28 minutes. The mean total adjustment times were 118.1 seconds for the DW protocol and 181.5 seconds for the CW protocol. The mean score regarding self-perception of the esthetic outcome was 73 for DW crowns and 69 for CW crowns; for discomfort, the mean score was 15.5 for DW and 62 for CW.
CONCLUSION: The DW approach resulted in a time reduction for both the impression phase and operative time.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app