Dental Impression TechniquesNCT07705009
Intraoral Scanning Versus Alginate Impressions in Dental Students
A study testing Conventional Alginate Impression, TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanner and Medit i700 Intraoral Scanner in people with Dental Impression Techniques, run by Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy at 1 site in Vietnam.
Trial summary
Dental impressions are used to create a record of a person's teeth and oral structures. Conventional impressions are made using impression material placed in a tray, whereas digital impressions are obtained using an intraoral scanner. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 24 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Dental Impression Techniques
- What is being tested?
- Conventional Alginate Impression, TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanner and Medit i700 Intraoral Scanner
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 171 participants
- Where
- 1 siteVietnam
- Study dates
- 1 May 2025to 31 Aug 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 18 to 24 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Undergraduate dental students at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University.
- Aged 18 to 24 years.
- Willing to undergo one maxillary and one mandibular dental impression using the assigned technique.
- Willing and able to complete the study questionnaire.
- Provided written informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Currently undergoing orthodontic treatment.
- Presence of a systemic disease or acute condition that limited the ability to cooperate or increased the risk of discomfort during impression taking or intraoral scanning, including an acute respiratory disorder or frequent vomiting.
- Limited mouth opening or an oral and maxillofacial condition that prevented correct impression-tray seating or scanner-tip placement according to the study protocol.
- A maxillofacial abnormality that markedly affected the procedure or caused significant recording distortion.
- An excessive gag reflex that prevented completion of the assigned procedure.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Vietnam1 site
Faculty of Odonto-Stomatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University
Huế, 530000
About this study
Official title: Procedure Time and Patient Comfort of Intraoral Scanning Versus Alginate Impressions Among Dental Students: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Dental impressions are used to create a record of a person's teeth and oral structures. Conventional impressions are made using impression material placed in a tray, whereas digital impressions are obtained using an intraoral scanner.
This randomized clinical trial compared conventional alginate impressions with digital intraoral scanning using the TRIOS 3 and Medit i700 scanners among dental students aged 18 to 24 years. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three impression techniques. Each participant underwent recording of both the upper and lower dental arches using the assigned technique.
The study primarily compared the chairside time required for each technique and the participants' experience immediately after the procedure. Comfort, nausea, breathing, pain, dry-mouth sensation, perceived procedure speed, overall satisfaction, and preference for conventional or digital impressions were also evaluated.
- Conditions
- Dental Impression Techniques
- Being tested
- Conventional Alginate Impression, TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanner, Medit i700 Intraoral Scanner
- Keywords
- Intraoral Scanning, Digital Dental Impression, Alginate Impression, Procedure Time, Patient Comfort, Dental Students
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Conventional Alginate ImpressionProcedure or surgery
Maxillary and mandibular conventional impressions were obtained using Tropical alginate impression material and stock trays. The alginate was mixed, placed in the impression tray, and used according to the manufacturer's instructions.
TRIOS 3 Intraoral ScannerProcedure or surgery
Maxillary and mandibular full-arch digital impressions were obtained using the TRIOS 3 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. A bite-registration scan was also obtained.
Medit i700 Intraoral ScannerProcedure or surgery
Maxillary and mandibular full-arch digital impressions were obtained using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. A bite-registration scan was also obtained.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Alginate Impression | Active comparator | Participants underwent maxillary and mandibular conventional impressions using alginate impression material and stock trays according to the manufacturer's instructions. Receives: Procedure: Conventional Alginate Impression |
| TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanning | Experimental | Participants underwent full-arch maxillary and mandibular digital impressions and bite registration using the TRIOS 3 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. Receives: Procedure: TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanner |
| Medit i700 Intraoral Scanning | Experimental | Participants underwent full-arch maxillary and mandibular digital impressions and bite registration using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. Receives: Procedure: Medit i700 Intraoral Scanner |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Total Chairside Procedure Time
Total chairside procedure time was measured in seconds using a digital stopwatch and calculated as the sum of the recorded procedural stages. For the conventional alginate group, the stages included maxillary mixing, maxillary impression taking, mandibular mixing, and mandibular impression taking. For the digital groups, the stages included patient and case information entry, maxillary scanning, and mandibular scanning. Bite-registration time was excluded from the total procedure time because there was no equivalent stage in the conventional alginate workflow.
Measured: During the assigned impression procedure at the single study visit
Patient-Reported Overall Comfort During the Impression Procedure
Overall comfort during the assigned impression procedure was assessed immediately after the procedure using a 0-to-100 visual analogue scale. Higher scores indicated greater comfort.
Measured: Immediately after completion of the assigned impression procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Jul 2026
- Study start1 May 2025
- Primary completion31 Aug 2025
- Study completion31 Aug 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Dental Impression TechniquesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 171 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Le Van Nhat Thang, Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy
- Investigators
- Van Nhat Thang Le, DDS PhD, Principal investigator, Faculty of Odonto-Stomatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07705009
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- H2025/074
- Status last verified
- Jul 2026
- First submitted
- 10 Jul 2026
- Last updated
- 15 Jul 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
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
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Jul 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Procedure Time and Patient Comfort of Intraoral Scanning Versus Alginate Impressions Among Dental Students: A Randomized Clinical Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07705009
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- H2025/074
- Conditions
- Dental Impression Techniques
- Keywords
- Intraoral Scanning, Digital Dental Impression, Alginate Impression, Procedure Time, Patient Comfort, Dental Students
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 171 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hue University of Medicine and PharmacyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 May 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Jul 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Dental impressions are used to create a record of a person's teeth and oral structures. Conventional impressions are made using impression material placed in a tray, whereas digital impressions are obtained using an intraoral scanner.
This randomized clinical trial compared conventional alginate impressions with digital intraoral scanning using the TRIOS 3 and Medit i700 scanners among dental students aged 18 to 24 years. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three impression techniques. Each participant underwent recording of both the upper and lower dental arches using the assigned technique.
The study primarily compared the chairside time required for each technique and the participants' experience immediately after the procedure. Comfort, nausea, breathing, pain, dry-mouth sensation, perceived procedure speed, overall satisfaction, and preference for conventional or digital impressions were also evaluated.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Alginate Impression | Active comparator | Procedure: Conventional Alginate ImpressionParticipants underwent maxillary and mandibular conventional impressions using alginate impression material and stock trays according to the manufacturer's instructions. |
| TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanning | Experimental | Procedure: TRIOS 3 Intraoral ScannerParticipants underwent full-arch maxillary and mandibular digital impressions and bite registration using the TRIOS 3 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. |
| Medit i700 Intraoral Scanning | Experimental | Procedure: Medit i700 Intraoral ScannerParticipants underwent full-arch maxillary and mandibular digital impressions and bite registration using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 24 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Undergraduate dental students at the University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University.
- Aged 18 to 24 years.
- Willing to undergo one maxillary and one mandibular dental impression using the assigned technique.
- Willing and able to complete the study questionnaire.
- Provided written informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Currently undergoing orthodontic treatment.
- Presence of a systemic disease or acute condition that limited the ability to cooperate or increased the risk of discomfort during impression taking or intraoral scanning, including an acute respiratory disorder or frequent vomiting.
- Limited mouth opening or an oral and maxillofacial condition that prevented correct impression-tray seating or scanner-tip placement according to the study protocol.
- A maxillofacial abnormality that markedly affected the procedure or caused significant recording distortion.
- An excessive gag reflex that prevented completion of the assigned procedure.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Conventional Alginate ImpressionMaxillary and mandibular conventional impressions were obtained using Tropical alginate impression material and stock trays. The alginate was mixed, placed in the impression tray, and used according to the manufacturer's instructions. | Procedure or surgery | Conventional Alginate Impression |
| TRIOS 3 Intraoral ScannerMaxillary and mandibular full-arch digital impressions were obtained using the TRIOS 3 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. A bite-registration scan was also obtained. | Procedure or surgery | TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanning |
| Medit i700 Intraoral ScannerMaxillary and mandibular full-arch digital impressions were obtained using the Medit i700 intraoral scanner according to the manufacturer's recommended scanning protocol. A bite-registration scan was also obtained. | Procedure or surgery | Medit i700 Intraoral Scanning |
Primary outcome
Total Chairside Procedure Time
Time frame: During the assigned impression procedure at the single study visit
Total chairside procedure time was measured in seconds using a digital stopwatch and calculated as the sum of the recorded procedural stages. For the conventional alginate group, the stages included maxillary mixing, maxillary impression taking, mandibular mixing, and mandibular impression taking. For the digital groups, the stages included patient and case information entry, maxillary scanning, and mandibular scanning. Bite-registration time was excluded from the total procedure time because there was no equivalent stage in the conventional alginate workflow.
Patient-Reported Overall Comfort During the Impression Procedure
Time frame: Immediately after completion of the assigned impression procedure
Overall comfort during the assigned impression procedure was assessed immediately after the procedure using a 0-to-100 visual analogue scale. Higher scores indicated greater comfort.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Jul 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 29602345Burzynski 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.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Dental Impression Techniques
Recruiting
Passive Fit of Implant-Supported Frameworks: Digital vs Conventional Impressions
Dental Implants, Edentulous Jaw
RecruitingObservational study
Risk Factors Associated With Infraposition of Implant Supported Single Crowns in the Anterior Maxilla
Infraposition, Estethics
Recruiting
Accuracy of Digital vs Conventional Denture Impressions: An In Vivo Study
Edentulism, Complete Dentures
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Van Nhat Thang Le, DDS PhD principal investigator
Faculty of Odonto-Stomatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Conventional Alginate Impression, TRIOS 3 Intraoral Scanner and Medit i700 Intraoral Scanner in people with Dental Impression Techniques, run by Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy at 1 site in Vietnam.
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 5 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Jul 2026. 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 Vietnam. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Total Chairside Procedure Time (time frame: During the assigned impression procedure at the single study visit). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT07705009, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 15 Jul 2026.