# The application of plotted surgical guides for pilot-guided and full-guided implant insertion– a prospective model study in a cohort of undergraduate dental students

## TL;DR

This study compares the accuracy and efficiency of two implant insertion methods using surgical guides in dental students.

## Contribution

It demonstrates that fully guided implant insertion improves accuracy for inexperienced students compared to pilot-drill guided methods.

## Key findings

- Fully guided implant insertion had a mean 3D deviation of 2.24°, significantly lower than 4.51° for pilot-drill guided insertion.
- Fully guided insertion took longer (15:22 min) than pilot-drill guided insertion (9:35 min).
- Undergraduate students showed high interest but low prior knowledge in implant dentistry.

## Abstract

Implant dentistry is an established therapy option with sufficient long-term success for the replacement of missing teeth. Education in implant dentistry should not only focus on theory but also on practical courses. The purpose of the current examination was to assess the accuracy of fully guided and pilot-drill guided implant insertion applying plotted static guides in a cohort of undergraduate dental students.

Matching a three-dimensional set of radiographic data and surface scans of 51 artificial mandibular models, 51 surgical templates were produced by plotting. Metal sleeves allowing either a pilot-drill or fully guided implant insertion were inserted alternatively in region 36 and 46. A total of 102 implants were inserted by 51 undergraduates. Subsequently, the positions of the implants were analyzed radiographically considering the accuracy. Additionally, the time required for implant insertion was recorded and a questionnaire was completed. Statistical analysis followed.

In general, the accuracy of fully guided implant insertion was higher compared to pilot-drill guided. Mean three-dimensional deviation was 2.24 ± 0.38 degrees for fully guided vs. 4.51 ± 2.20 degrees for pilot-drill guided implant insertion. Time required for fully guided implant insertion was statistically significant higher compared to pilot-drill guided (15:22 ± 5:22 vs. 9:35 ± 3:58 min, p < 0.01). The returned questionnaires reported a high interest but a self-assessed minor previous knowledge in implant dentistry.

The examination could show that inexperienced undergraduates benefited from fully guided implant insertion in a laboratory set-up. Based on the questionnaires there is a distinct demand for an extended education in implant dentistry among undergraduate students.