AzTrials
AzTrials

Alginate ImpressionNCT06345989

Time and Cost-implications of Intraoral Scans Vs Alginate Impressions

A study testing Alginate impression and Intraoral scan in people with Alginate Impression and Intraoral Scanner, run by University of Sheffield at 1 site in United Kingdom.

Not yet recruiting

Opening soon. The study is approved but enrolment has not started yet. Sites may already take enquiries.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

BACKGROUND: Alginate impressions have long been a staple in orthodontics, but with recent technological advancements, digital impressions via intraoral scans are gaining increasing popularity. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 9 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
Conditions the study is for
Alginate Impression, Intraoral Scanner, Time
What is being tested?
Alginate impression and Intraoral scan
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
68 participants
Where
1 siteUnited Kingdom
Study dates
Mar 2025to Mar 2026
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 9 years and older
  • All sexes
  • Healthy volunteers accepted
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Orthodontic patients aged 9 years and above requiring study models, having attended the orthodontic department at Nottingham University Hospitals for a new patient assessment.

Who cannot join

  • Patients who will not be undergoing orthodontic treatment in secondary care (referral back to primary care).
  • Patients who refuse to consent to inclusion in the trial.
  • Patients with contraindications to either impression method (e.g., severe gag reflex, claustrophobia, medical history that would preclude the taking of dental impressions).
  • Patients with severe dental anxiety.
  • Patients with cleft lip and/or palate.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

United Kingdom1 site
  • Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust

    Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, NG7 2UH

    Hannah Hook, BDS, 07853993215, hannah.hook@nuh.nhs.uk

    Andrew Flett, BDS, andrew.flett@nuh.nhs.uk

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: Time and Cost-implications of Intraoral Scans Vs Alginate Impressions: a Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Alginate impressions have long been a staple in orthodontics, but with recent technological advancements, digital impressions via intraoral scans are gaining increasing popularity. While much research has focused on patient preference and the accuracy of these techniques, there is a notable gap in the literature regarding chair side time and associated costs. Existing studies on chair side time comparisons between alginate impressions and intraoral scanning yield inconsistent results, underscoring the need for further investigation. This study aimed to evaluate the chair side time and cost implications of intraoral scanning and alginate impressions.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective is to compare the chair side time taken for alginate impressions and intraoral scanning of orthodontic patients aged 9 years and over in an orthodontic department at a district general hospital. The secondary objective is to evaluate the costs associated with alginate impressions and intraoral scanning of orthodontic patients described above.

Read more

DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, single-centre, parallel-arm randomised controlled trial (1:1 allocation) to be undertaken in a district general hospital. Sixty-eight orthodontic patients aged nine and above, requiring study models, will be recruited during new patient appointments at the Orthodontic Department at Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham. Patients will be randomly assigned to either the intraoral scan or alginate impression group, with chair side time recorded for each procedure, including retakes. The IOS group will use the 3Shape TRIOS scanner, while the alginate group will follow standard procedures. The costs of each technique will be calculated following the procedure. Ethical approval was obtained from a Health Research Authority Research Ethics Committee.

OUTCOMES: N/A

CONCLUSIONS: N/A

Read the detailed description

RATIONALE: This research project investigates the evolving landscape of orthodontic practices by comparing the time and cost implications of two prevalent techniques: intraoral scanning and traditional alginate impressions.

Whilst the majority of the existing literature reveals patient preference in favour of intraoral scanning, it remains common practice to use alginate impressions for orthodontic records. Considerations such as time implications, device costs, associated software expenses, and the need for clinician training pose challenges to widespread adoption of intraoral scanning. When comparing chairside time taken for intraoral scans versus alginate impressions, there are inconsistent findings, necessitating a comprehensive investigation.

The outcomes of this study will provide crucial insights into the practicality and economic viability of intraoral scanning versus alginate impressions in orthodontic settings, thereby informing clinical practices and facilitating technological assimilation within the United Kingdom. This research contributes to strengthening the evidence base surrounding orthodontic techniques and their implications for patient-centred care.

DESIGN: Prospective single-centre parallel-arm randomised controlled trial, with an allocation ratio of 1:1, to investigate the difference in chair side time and cost of alginate impressions vs intraoral scans.

SETTING: A single-centre study was undertaken in the Orthodontic Department at Queens Medical Centre (QMC), Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA:

  • Patients who will not be undergoing orthodontic treatment in secondary care (referral back to primary care).
  • Patients who refuse to consent to inclusion in the trial.
  • Patients with contraindications to either impression method (e.g., severe gag reflex, claustrophobia, medical history that would preclude the taking of dental impressions).
  • Patients with severe dental anxiety.
  • Patients with cleft lip and/or palate.

RECRUITMENT: Orthodontic patients aged 9 years and above attending the orthodontic department at Nottingham University Hospital for a new patient assessment will be assessed by an appropriately trained clinician for their eligibility for inclusion in the trial.

CONSENT: The Chief Investigator (CI) retains overall responsibility for the conduct of research, including the taking of informed consent of patients. The CI must ensure that any person delegated responsibility to participate in the informed consent process is duly authorised, trained and competent to participate according to the ethically approved protocol, principles of Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and Declaration of Helsinki.

The clinician will carry out a screening process consisting of a written checklist to assess whether patients meet the inclusion criteria. Following the identification of eligible patients, the trial will be discussed in more detail with the potential patient and/or their parent/guardian. Discussion of the trial will be undertaken by a clinician trained in the REC-approved research protocol. The discussion will involve the following:

  • Introduction
  • An explanation to the patient and their parent/guardian as to the purpose and the nature of the research
  • An outline of what the research involves.
  • Involvement
  • What would be required by the patient / their child.
  • Benefits
  • Discussion of any potential benefits that may be involved.
  • Risks o Discussion of any potential risks that may be involved.
  • Alternatives
  • Discussion of the alternative options should the patient and/or their parent/guardian not want to take part in the trial.
  • Withdrawal
  • Should the patient and/or their parent/guardian wish to withdraw from the study, they may do so at any time and do not have to give a reason as to why they are withdrawing.
  • It will be emphasised that should the patient and/or their parent/guardian choose to withdraw from the study, this will not impact the care they receive.
  • Questions
  • The patient and/or their parent/guardian will be allowed to ask any questions they may have related to the trial.
  • Capacity
  • The capacity of the patients shall be assessed.
  • Patients over the age of 16 may consent to inclusion in the trial should they have the capacity to do so.
  • Contact o Information regarding a point of contact for the trial will be given to the patient and/or their parent/guardian.

Any patients who meet the exclusion criteria will not be included in the trial. Following a verbal discussion of the trial, the patient and/or their parent/guardian will be provided with a patient information sheet and given the opportunity to ask any questions before deciding if they would provisionally like to enrol in the trial.

At the beginning of the next visit, the patient's and/or their parent's/guardian's consent to inclusion in the trial will be confirmed. Should the patient and/or their parent/guardian consent to inclusion, the patient will be enrolled in the trial and randomly allocated to a treatment group (either alginate impression or intraoral scan). Informed consent must be obtained before the patient undergoes procedures that are specifically for the trial.

Should the patient and/or their parent/guardian decline to participate in the trial, they will continue with their normal orthodontic treatment and not receive any further information regarding the trial. For children under the age of 16 years, assent will be sought from their parent/guardian. Adults who are unable to consent will not be included in the trial.

Should a patient and/or their parent/guardian wish to withdraw from the trial, they may do so at any point and do not have to stipulate as to why. Patients and/or their parents/guardians will be reassured that withdrawal from the trial will not affect their treatment.

Refusal from the patient to take part in the trial must be respected, and no reason is required. Patients remain free to withdraw from the trial at any time without stipulating why and without prejudicing their further treatment. Patients must be provided with a contact point where they may obtain further information about the trial. Data collected up to the point of withdrawal can only be used after withdrawal if the patient has consented to this.

TRIAL: Once consent has been gained and the patient has been randomly allocated to a treatment group, one of the following procedures will be followed:

Intraoral scanner group

  • The 3Shape TRIOS unit will be set up, tip warmed, and patient details entered into the system.
  • Timer started: A timer will be started by the dental nurse when the 3Shape TRIOS unit is removed from the holder by the clinician.
  • The clinician will complete the scan in the order on the system (lower arch, upper arch and bite registration) and save it to the system.
  • Timer stopped: Once the scan taken is of good quality, the clinician will place the 3Shape TRIOS unit back in the holder, and the dental nurse will stop the timer.
  • The clinician will check the quality of the scan against example photos, which will demonstrate good quality scans. If the scan does not meet these quality standards, it will require a retake. If any retakes are required, the timer will be resumed, and the procedure will be carried out as above.
  • The time taken for the procedure and the number of retakes required will be recorded in the data collection section of the case report form (CRF).

Alginate impression group

  • The clinical area will be set up with the appropriate equipment- alginate, water, mixing bowl, spatula, measuring cup, upper and lower trays, adhesive and wax.
  • The clinician will check the appropriate tray sizes for the patient.
  • The timer started: A timer will be started by the dental nurse when the water for the alginate impression is poured into the mixing bowl.
  • The upper and lower impressions will be taken.
  • A wax bite registration will then be taken.
  • Timer stopped: The timer will be stopped by the dental nurse when the bite registration is removed from the patient's mouth and placed in the designated area on the worktop.
  • The clinician will check the quality of the impressions and bite registration against example photos, which will demonstrate good quality impressions/bite registration. If the impressions or bite registration does not meet these quality standards, then they will require a retake. If any retakes are required, the timer will be resumed, and the procedure will be carried out as above.
  • The time taken for the procedure, a number of scoops of alginate used and the number of retakes required will be recorded in the data collection section of the CRF.

Measurements taken will only include the chairside time taken to make the impression and will not include time taken for disinfection and processing of impressions.

ANALYSES: Tests for normality will be used to determine whether the data is normally distributed. If the data is normally distributed and with equal variances between the two groups, then a two-sided independent t-test will be used. If the data is not normally distributed, a Mann-Whitney U test will be used.

Being tested
Alginate impression, Intraoral scan
Keywords
Orthodontics, Alginate, Impression, Intraoral, Scanner

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Alginate impressionProcedure or surgery

    Alginate impressions are a traditional method for creating dental moulds which are used in orthodontic records. Plastic trays are sized to fit the upper and lower jaws, and the alginate is mixed into a putty before being placed in the trays. The putty is then used to take detailed impressions of the patient's teeth. To capture an accurate bite registration, the patient bites down on a piece of warmed wax.

  • Intraoral scanProcedure or surgery

    Intraoral scanners capture multiple images of the mouth, which are combined to create a three-dimensional model of the patient's upper and lower teeth. The scanning wand is passed methodically over the surface of the teeth to gather all the necessary information, which is displayed in real-time on a computer screen.

Study groups in NCT06345989
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Alginate impressionActive comparatorAlginate impression
Receives: Procedure: Alginate impression
Intraoral scanActive comparatorIntraoral scan using Trios 3Shape Scanner
Receives: Procedure: Intraoral scan

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Chairside time taken for alginate impressions vs intraoral scans.

    To compare the mean chairside time taken for alginate impression taking and intraoral scanning of orthodontic patients aged 9 years and over, in an orthodontic department at a district general hospital.

    Measured: 12 months

Secondary outcomes (1)
  1. Cost implications of alginate impressions vs intraoral scans.

    Evaluation of the costs associated with alginate impressions and intraoral scanning of orthodontic patients described above.

    Measured: 12 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted3 Apr 2024
  2. Study startMar 2025 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionMar 2026 (estimated)
  4. Study completionMar 2026 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Health services research
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Model description
Prospective single-centre parallel arm randomised controlled trial, with an allocation ratio of 1:1 to investigate the difference in chairside time and cost of alginate impressions vs intraoral scans.
Masking
Single blind
Who is masked
Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
68 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06345989
Sponsor's protocol ID
187157
Other IDs
340246
Status last verified
Dec 2024
First submitted
28 Mar 2024
Last updated
5 Mar 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Undecided

Publications

  • Bosoni C, Nieri M, Franceschi D, Souki BQ, Franchi L, Giuntini V. Comparison between digital and conventional impression techniques in children on preference, time and comfort: A crossover randomized controlled trial. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2023 Nov;26(4):585-590. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12648. Epub 2023 Mar 20.

    PubMed 36891891
  • Burhardt L, Livas C, Kerdijk W, van der Meer WJ, Ren Y. Treatment comfort, time perception, and preference for conventional and digital impression techniques: A comparative study in young patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Aug;150(2):261-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.12.027.

    PubMed 27476358
  • Burzynski JA, Firestone AR, Beck FM, Fields HW Jr, Deguchi T. Comparison of digital intraoral scanners and alginate impressions: Time and patient satisfaction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018 Apr;153(4):534-541. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.08.017.

    PubMed 29602345
  • Christopoulou I, Kaklamanos EG, Makrygiannakis MA, Bitsanis I, Tsolakis AI. Patient-reported experiences and preferences with intraoral scanners: a systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2022 Jan 25;44(1):56-65. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjab027.

    PubMed 34089258
  • Glisic O, Hoejbjerre L, Sonnesen L. A comparison of patient experience, chair-side time, accuracy of dental arch measurements and costs of acquisition of dental models. Angle Orthod. 2019 Nov;89(6):868-875. doi: 10.2319/020619-84.1. Epub 2019 Jul 1.

    PubMed 31259615
  • Grunheid T, McCarthy SD, Larson BE. Clinical use of a direct chairside oral scanner: an assessment of accuracy, time, and patient acceptance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014 Nov;146(5):673-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.07.023. Epub 2014 Oct 28.

    PubMed 25439218
  • Luqmani S, Jones A, Andiappan M, Cobourne MT. A comparison of conventional vs automated digital Peer Assessment Rating scoring using the Carestream 3600 scanner and CS Model+ software system: A randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020 Feb;157(2):148-155.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.10.011.

    PubMed 32005465
  • Mangano A, Beretta M, Luongo G, Mangano C, Mangano F. Conventional Vs Digital Impressions: Acceptability, Treatment Comfort and Stress Among Young Orthodontic Patients. Open Dent J. 2018 Jan 31;12:118-124. doi: 10.2174/1874210601812010118. eCollection 2018.

    PubMed 29492177
  • Mangano F, Gandolfi A, Luongo G, Logozzo S. Intraoral scanners in dentistry: a review of the current literature. BMC Oral Health. 2017 Dec 12;17(1):149. doi: 10.1186/s12903-017-0442-x.

    PubMed 29233132
  • Sivaramakrishnan G, Alsobaiei M, Sridharan K. Patient preference and operating time for digital versus conventional impressions: a network meta-analysis. Aust Dent J. 2020 Mar;65(1):58-69. doi: 10.1111/adj.12737. Epub 2019 Dec 19.

    PubMed 31749234
  • Yilmaz H, Aydin MN. Digital versus conventional impression method in children: Comfort, preference and time. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2019 Nov;29(6):728-735. doi: 10.1111/ipd.12566. Epub 2019 Aug 13.

    PubMed 31348834

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing Alginate impression and Intraoral scan in people with Alginate Impression and Intraoral Scanner, run by University of Sheffield at 1 site in United Kingdom.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Miss H Hook, BDS (0115 924 9924 ext. 88965, hannah_hook@outlook.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Chairside time taken for alginate impressions vs intraoral scans. (time frame: 12 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06345989, which also lists 11 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 5 Mar 2025.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in