Time-Efficiency Analysis Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Crossover Trial

Joda, Tim; Brägger, Urs (2015). Time-Efficiency Analysis Comparing Digital and Conventional Workflows for Implant Crowns: A Prospective Clinical Crossover Trial. International journal of oral & maxillofacial implants, 30(5), pp. 1047-1053. Quintessence Publ. 10.11607/jomi.3963

Full text not available from this repository. (Request a copy)

PURPOSE

To compare time-efficiency in the production of implant crowns using a digital workflow versus the conventional pathway.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective clinical study used a crossover design that included 20 study participants receiving single-tooth replacements in posterior sites. Each patient received a customized titanium abutment plus a computer-aided design/computer-assisted manufacture (CAD/CAM) zirconia suprastructure (for those in the test group, using digital workflow) and a standardized titanium abutment plus a porcelain-fused-to-metal crown (for those in the control group, using a conventional pathway). The start of the implant prosthetic treatment was established as the baseline. Time-efficiency analysis was defined as the primary outcome, and was measured for every single clinical and laboratory work step in minutes. Statistical analysis was calculated with the Wilcoxon rank sum test.

RESULTS

All crowns could be provided within two clinical appointments, independent of the manufacturing process. The mean total production time, as the sum of clinical plus laboratory work steps, was significantly different. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) time was 185.4 ± 17.9 minutes for the digital workflow process and 223.0 ± 26.2 minutes for the conventional pathway (P = .0001). Therefore, digital processing for overall treatment was 16% faster. Detailed analysis for the clinical treatment revealed a significantly reduced mean ± SD chair time of 27.3 ± 3.4 minutes for the test group compared with 33.2 ± 4.9 minutes for the control group (P = .0001). Similar results were found for the mean laboratory work time, with a significant decrease of 158.1 ± 17.2 minutes for the test group vs 189.8 ± 25.3 minutes for the control group (P = .0001).

CONCLUSION

Only a few studies have investigated efficiency parameters of digital workflows compared with conventional pathways in implant dental medicine. This investigation shows that the digital workflow seems to be more time-efficient than the established conventional production pathway for fixed implant-supported crowns. Both clinical chair time and laboratory manufacturing steps could be effectively shortened with the digital process of intraoral scanning plus CAD/CAM technology.

Item Type:	Journal Article (Original Article)
Division/Institute:	04 Faculty of Medicine > School of Dental Medicine > Department of Reconstructive Dentistry and Gerodontology
UniBE Contributor:	Joda, Tim, Brägger, Urs
Subjects:	600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
ISSN:	0882-2786
Publisher:	Quintessence Publ.
Language:	English
Submitter:	Eveline Carmen Schuler
Date Deposited:	29 Mar 2016 09:53
Last Modified:	05 Dec 2022 14:52
Publisher DOI:	10.11607/jomi.3963
PubMed ID:	26394340
Uncontrolled Keywords:	conventional pathway, dental crown, dental implant, digital, time-efficiency, workflow
URI:	https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/77413