Comparison of experience curves between two 3-dimensional intraoral scanners.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

Conventional impression-making methods are being replaced by intraoral digital scanning. How long dental professionals take to master the new technologies is unknown.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this human subject study was to compare the experience curves of 2 intraoral scanners among dental hygienists and determine whether repeated scanning experience could change the scan time (ST).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 29 dental hygienists with more than 3 years of working experience were recruited (group 1: 3-5 years; group 2: >6 years of clinical experience) to learn the iTero and Trios systems. All learners scanned the oral cavities of 4 human participants (participants A, B, C, and D) 10 times (T1-T10) throughout the learning sessions and the experimental dentoform model twice at the beginning and end of the 10 sessions. ST was measured, and changes in ST were compared between the 2 devices.

RESULTS

The average ST for 10 sessions was greater with iTero than with Trios, but the decrease in the measured ST was greater for iTero than for Trios. Baseline and postexperience STs with iTero showed statistically significant differences, with a decrease in time related to the clinical experience levels of the dental hygienists (group 1: T2 and T4, P<.01; group 2: T2 and T5, P<.01). The experience curve with iTero was not influenced by the human participant's intraoral characteristics, and greater ST was shown for participants B and C than for participants A and D with Trios.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the learning rate of iTero was rapid, the average ST for iTero was longer than Trios, and clinical experience levels influenced the operator's ability to manipulate the device. In contrast, the learning rate of Trios was slow, and measured ST was shorter than iTero, and was not influenced by clinical experience.