# Perceptions of Young Patients During Digital and Conventional Impression-Taking: A Comparative Semi-experimental Randomized Study

## TL;DR

Digital dental impressions are preferred by children aged 6-14 for being faster and more comfortable than traditional methods.

## Contribution

This study is one of the first to compare digital and conventional impression techniques in children under 10 using a crossover design.

## Key findings

- 62.5% of children preferred digital impressions due to comfort and speed.
- Conventional impressions caused more breathing discomfort and fatigue compared to digital methods.
- Digital impressions were associated with fewer gag reflexes and higher future preference rates.

## Abstract

Introduction

Optical impressions have revolutionized dentistry, but their use in children under 10 years old remains underexplored due to age-specific challenges.

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate levels of comfort, cooperation, preferences, and time required for conventional versus digital impressions in children consulting at the Dental Consultation and Treatment Center in Casablanca.

Methods

This semi-experimental, randomized crossover study compared conventional alginate impression and digital impression in 40 children and adolescents aged 6-14 years. Participants underwent both techniques in a random order, with a seven-day interval between sessions. Data analysis included descriptive statistics and inferential tests (Student's t-test, ANOVA, χ2 test, Fisher's test, McNemar's test, Mann-Whitney U test, and Kruskal-Wallis test) to study associations between sociodemographic characteristics and patient preferences and behaviors regarding dental impressions.

Results

The mean age of participants was 9.3±2.25 years. Digital impressions were preferred by 62.5% of children, who found them quicker and more comfortable. Around 22.5% of children experienced breathing discomfort and a gag reflex with conventional impressions. About 60% of children found conventional impressions tiring, compared to 17.5% for digital impressions. Around 62.5% of children would choose digital impressions for future procedures, reflecting Gen Z's affinity for interactive experiences.

Discussion

This study demonstrates that digital impressions with Trios 3 (3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) are perceived as more comfortable and faster than conventional alginate impressions among children aged 6-14 at the Casablanca center, aligning with prior pediatric research that reports similar advantages of intraoral scanners over traditional methods while noting no major differences in anxiety or behavior. However, the results should be interpreted within the context of a single scanner model and a crossover design. Further multicenter studies with diverse devices and larger samples are warranted to confirm these findings.

Conclusion

Digital impressions have shown superiority, even among younger patients. Nevertheless, their adoption is hindered by high costs, a steep learning curve, sensitivity to hypersalivation, and head movement. Conventional impressions remain relevant for specific indications, and prior child preparation is crucial for a successful outcome.