DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION AND GUARDIAN ASSESSMENT OF USING DIGITAL IMPRESSION IN NEONATES VERSUS THE CONVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES | ||
| Alexandria Dental Journal | ||
| Article 4, Volume 49, Issue 1, April 2024, Pages 129-133 PDF (423.59 K) | ||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||
| DOI: 10.21608/adjalexu.2023.220123.1393 | ||
| Authors | ||
| Ingy Soliman* 1; Dina A. Sharaf2; Ahmed Shawky3; Aly M. Atteya4 | ||
| 1lecturer of prosthodontics, faculty of dentistry, Alexandria university | ||
| 2Lecturer, Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt | ||
| 3Lecturer, Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Egypt. | ||
| 4Department of Maxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, Faculty of Dentistry, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt. | ||
| Abstract | ||
| Background: Cleft lip and palate are common facial deformities, that can involve the lip only, lip and palate, or palate only. Dental casts are important tool in planning, documentation, and analysis of the dental arch forms. Impression taking in a neonate is a technique-sensitive procedure, but with the use of digital dental technologies and intraoral scanning, it become more safe, more effective, and more accurate. Aim: This article aimed to evaluate the reliability of the use of conventional impressions versus digital ones to resemble the neonate’s ULCLP oral defect. Assessing the attitudes of guardians with different educational backgrounds regarding impression registration techniques and their compliance with using feeding appliances for neonates. Materials and Methods: 7 ULCLP non-syndromic neonates of 0-28 days presented to the cleft center of the Maxillofacial department. Impressions were registered using conventional versus optical impression using intraoral (3D) scanner. Data were generated by two impression system combinations through STL by scanning the impression using Geomagic software. As well as manual digital linear calibration of both conventional stone model and the 3D printing the intraoral scanned one. Results: The validity of using intraoral digital impression technique as viable alternative to conventional ones was statistically significant Regarding the PISO questionnaire, guardian’s perception, and experience of the digital impression technique it showed a higher clinical significance in comparison to conventional one. Conclusion: Using 3D digital impression reduces multiple risks for both neonates and their guardians. Digital data was utilized as records for further appliance planning and fabrication. | ||
| Keywords | ||
| NAM; Unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP); Intraoral scanning; PISO questionnaire; Guardian assessment | ||
|
Statistics Article View: 284 PDF Download: 457 |
||
