Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial
Published 2016 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Time efficiency, difficulty, and operator's preference comparing digital and conventional implant impressions: a randomized controlled trial
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
Volume 28, Issue 10, Pages 1318-1323
Publisher
Wiley
Online
2016-09-06
DOI
10.1111/clr.12982
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Time-efficiency analysis of the treatment with monolithic implant crowns in a digital workflow: a randomized controlled trial
- (2016) Tim Joda et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- Comparison of digital scanning and polyvinyl siloxane impression techniques by dental students: instructional efficiency and attitudes towards technology
- (2016) A. M. Marti et al. European Journal of Dental Education
- Digital versus conventional impressions for fixed prosthodontics: A systematic review and meta-analysis
- (2016) Konstantinos M. Chochlidakis et al. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Patient-centered outcomes comparing digital and conventional implant impression procedures: a randomized crossover trial
- (2015) Tim Joda et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- Time-Efficiency Analysis Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Crossover Trial
- (2015) Tim Joda et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS
- Digital versus analog complete-arch impressions for single-unit premolar implant crowns: Operating time and patient preference
- (2015) Ulf Schepke et al. JOURNAL OF PROSTHETIC DENTISTRY
- Intraoral Digital Impression Technique Compared to Conventional Impression Technique. A Randomized Clinical Trial
- (2015) Björn Gjelvold et al. Journal of Prosthodontics-Implant Esthetic and Reconstructive Dentistry
- Complete digital workflow for the production of implant-supported single-unit monolithic crowns
- (2014) Tim Joda et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis
- (2014) Tim Joda et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- The virtual patient in dental medicine
- (2014) Tim Joda et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- CAD/CAM Technology for Implant Abutments, Crowns, and Superstructures
- (2014) Theodoros Kapos et al. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL IMPLANTS
- Impressions Are Changing
- (2014) Gordon J. Christensen JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION
- Integrating Three-Dimensional Digital Technologies for Comprehensive Implant Dentistry
- (2014) Neal Patel JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION
- The time efficiency of intraoral scanners
- (2014) Sebastian B.M. Patzelt et al. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION
- Comparison of digital and conventional impression techniques: evaluation of patients’ perception, treatment comfort, effectiveness and clinical outcomes
- (2014) Emir Yuzbasioglu et al. BMC Oral Health
- Dental practitioners and a digital future: an initial exploration of barriers and incentives to adopting digital technologies
- (2013) M. M. van der Zande et al. BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL
- Patients' preferences when comparing analogue implant impressions using a polyether impression material versus digital impressions (Intraoral Scan) of dental implants
- (2013) Daniel Wismeijer et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- Digital vs. conventional implant impressions: efficiency outcomes
- (2012) Sang J. Lee et al. CLINICAL ORAL IMPLANTS RESEARCH
- The future of dental devices is digital
- (2011) Richard van Noort DENTAL MATERIALS
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create NowAsk a Question. Answer a Question.
Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.
Get Started