Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between intraoral scanning and conventional impressions for complete-arch implant prostheses: a pilot RCT
Originally at sciencedirect.com
Summary & scoring by The Bell Brief (Dr. Jennifer Bell) using the Drill-Down Protocol (Drill-Down Score) — not the original publisher.
Why it matters for dental
A new pilot RCT shows that intraoral scanning for complete-arch implant prostheses may improve short-term patient comfort and satisfaction versus conventional impressions—signaling that high-volume implant practices should begin budgeting for scanner upgrades and staff training if they want to remain competitive.
Key points
- Study compares intraoral scanning vs conventional impressions for full-arch implant prostheses in a randomized controlled design (Journal of Dentistry, Nov 2026).
- Primary endpoints include short-term clinical outcomes (tissue health, fit accuracy) and patient-reported satisfaction metrics.
- For implant-heavy practices and DSOs, results may inform capital-equipment ROI models and marketing claims around patient experience.
- Because this is a pilot study, practices should treat findings as directional rather than definitive until larger trials are published.
Who should care
Read the original on Journal of Dentistry
Full reporting and any paywall content live on sciencedirect.com. We summarize and score; we do not republish.
Related
- ·Regulatory
Florida dental office remains closed amid patient death investigation
- ·Clinical
Association of toothbrushing, dental flossing, and interdental brushing with stroke risk
- ·Clinical
Clinical accuracy and short-term outcomes of intraoral photogrammetry for complete-arch implant rehabilitation: A retrospective multicentre study on 35 patients
- ·Clinical
Site‐Resolved Gingival Microcirculation and Colour Features in Health and Early Inflammation