[ L’empreinte numérique vs l’empreinte conventionnelle : Revue systématique ]
Volume 40, Issue 1, December 2018, Pages 110–119
Saida El Khayati1 and Amal El Yamani2
1 Résidente au service de Prothèse Conjointe du CCTD de Rabat, Université Mohammed V, Maroc
2 Professeur d’Enseignement Supérieur, Chef du service de Prothèse Conjointe du CCTD de Rabat, Université Mohammed V, Morocco
Original language: French
Copyright © 2018 ISSR Journals. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
After conquering the world of the fixed prosthesis, the digital impression opened to the prosthesis, orthodontics and implantology. Certainly its benefit is present if only for the treatment of the imprint and its archiving, but the concept of evidence-based medicine is broader than that. Several clinical studies have focused on the study of the comparison between optical and conventional impressions, but only a small number of publications reflect a critical analysis of the literature, namely the randomized controlled clinical trials nowadays corresponding to gold standard in terms of level of evidence and systematic quantitative reviews and meta-analyzes of these tests. Within the fixed prosthesis department, we are equipped with a machining machine and in order to make our workflow totally digital, we wonder about the usefulness of introducing the optical impression in our practice. This work was organized in four parts according to the IMRAD structure (introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion). This is a systematic review of randomized, quasi-randomized controlled trials conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes) criteria and the articles were analyzed according to the PICO model (Patient / Problem, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome).
Author Keywords: intra-oral scanner, computer-aided manufacturing design, digital flow, extra-oral CT, prosthetic rehabilitation.
Volume 40, Issue 1, December 2018, Pages 110–119
Saida El Khayati1 and Amal El Yamani2
1 Résidente au service de Prothèse Conjointe du CCTD de Rabat, Université Mohammed V, Maroc
2 Professeur d’Enseignement Supérieur, Chef du service de Prothèse Conjointe du CCTD de Rabat, Université Mohammed V, Morocco
Original language: French
Copyright © 2018 ISSR Journals. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
After conquering the world of the fixed prosthesis, the digital impression opened to the prosthesis, orthodontics and implantology. Certainly its benefit is present if only for the treatment of the imprint and its archiving, but the concept of evidence-based medicine is broader than that. Several clinical studies have focused on the study of the comparison between optical and conventional impressions, but only a small number of publications reflect a critical analysis of the literature, namely the randomized controlled clinical trials nowadays corresponding to gold standard in terms of level of evidence and systematic quantitative reviews and meta-analyzes of these tests. Within the fixed prosthesis department, we are equipped with a machining machine and in order to make our workflow totally digital, we wonder about the usefulness of introducing the optical impression in our practice. This work was organized in four parts according to the IMRAD structure (introduction, materials and methods, results and discussion). This is a systematic review of randomized, quasi-randomized controlled trials conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyzes) criteria and the articles were analyzed according to the PICO model (Patient / Problem, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome).
Author Keywords: intra-oral scanner, computer-aided manufacturing design, digital flow, extra-oral CT, prosthetic rehabilitation.
Abstract: (french)
Après avoir conquis le monde de la prothèse fixée, l’empreinte numérique s’est ouverte à la prothèse adjointe, à l’orthodontie et à l’implantologie. Certes son bénéfice est présent si ce n’est que pour le traitement de l’empreinte et son archivage, mais le concept de l’evidence based medecine est plus large que cela. Plusieurs travaux cliniques se sont intéressés à l’étude de la comparaison entre empreinte optique et conventionnelle, mais seul un nombre réduit de publications reflètent une analyse critique de la littérature à savoir les essais cliniques contrôlés randomisés correspondant de nos jours au gold standard en terme de niveau de preuve ainsi que les revues systématiques quantitatives et les méta-analyses de ces essais précités. Au sein du service de prothèse fixée, on est équipé d’une usineuse et afin de rendre notre chaine de travail totalement numérique, on s’interroge sur l’utilité d’introduire l’empreinte optique dans notre pratique. Ce travail a été organisé en 4 volets selon la structure IMRAD (introduction, matériels and méthodes, résultats and discussion). Il s’agit d’une revue systématique d’essais contrôlés randomisés et quasi-randomisés réalisée selon les critères PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) et les articles ont été analysés selon le modèle PICO (Patient / Problem, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome).
Author Keywords: scanner intra-oral, conception fabrication assistée par ordinateur, flux numérique, scanner extra-oral, réhabilitation prothétique.
How to Cite this Article
Saida El Khayati and Amal El Yamani, “Numeric impression vs conventional impression : Systematic review,” International Journal of Innovation and Scientific Research, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 110–119, December 2018.
