This review elaborately answers to this question and summarizes the stages of complete digital workflow in dental applications.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The introduction of computer-aided manufacturing technologies and further developments have changed the routine workflow in dentistry, and dentists are now rapidly shifting from conventional to digital.
📊
Key Findings & Data:As a result, intra-oral scanners have become a standard device in dental clinics even though they have a considerable cost.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This review elaborately answers to this question and summarizes the stages of complete digital workflow in dental applications.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:digital dentistry · computer-aided manufacturing · complete digital workflow
Abstract
The introduction of computer-aided manufacturing technologies and further developments have changed the routine workflow in dentistry, and dentists are now rapidly shifting from conventional to digital. As a result, intra-oral scanners have become a standard device in dental clinics even though they have a considerable cost. One of the important reasons of this digital transition is to ensure standardized-quality manufacturing with a shorter chair time, which is promised by complete digital workflow. So, what does complete digital workflow mean for dentistry? This review elaborately answers to this question and summarizes the stages of complete digital workflow in dental applications.
KALELİ, N., URAL, Ç. (2021). What does complete digital workflow mean for dentistry?. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3s, 175–179. https://ajindex.com/articles/677949
Ahlholm, P., Sipilä, K., Vallittu, P., Jakonen, M., Kotiranta, U., 2018. Digital versus conventional impressions in fixed prosthodontics: a review. J. Prosthodont. 27, 35-41.
Alghazzawi, T.F., 2016. Advancements in CAD/CAM technology: Options for practical implementation. J. Prosthodont. Res. 60, 72-84.
Arısan, V., Karabuda, C.Z., Özdemir, T., 2010a. Implant surgery using bone‐and mucosa‐supported stereolithographic guides in totally edentulous jaws: surgical and post‐operative outcomes of computer‐aided vs. standard techniques. Clin. Oral. Implants. Res. 21, 980-988.
Arısan, V., Karabuda, Z.C., Özdemir, T., 2010b. Accuracy of two stereolithographic guide systems for computer‐aided implant placement: a computed tomography‐based clinical comparative study. J. Periodontol. 81, 43-51.
Block, M.S., Emery, R.W., 2016. Static or dynamic navigation for implant placement—choosing the method of guidance. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 74, 269-277.
Buser, D., Martin, W., Belser, U.C., 2004. Optimizing esthetics for implant restorations in the anterior maxilla: anatomic and surgical considerations. Int. J. Oral. Maxillofac. Implants. 19, 43-61.
Coachman, C., Calamita, M.A., Coachman, F.G., Coachman, R.G., Sesma, N., 2017. Facially generated and cephalometric guided 3D digital design for complete mouth implant rehabilitation: a clinical report. J. Prosthet. Dent. 117, 577-586.
D'haese, J., Ackhurst, J., Wismeijer, D., De Bruyn, H., Tahmaseb, A., 2017. Current state of the art of computer‐guided implant surgery. Periodontol. 2000. 73, 121-133.
De Angelis, P., Passarelli, P.C., Gasparini, G., Boniello, R., D'amato, G., De Angelis, S., 2020. Monolithic CAD-CAM lithium disilicate versus monolithic CAD-CAM zirconia for single implant-supported posterior crowns using a digital workflow: A 3-year cross-sectional retrospective study. J. Prosthet. Dent. 123, 252-256.
Dörner, K., Edelman, D., 2015. What ‘digital’really means. McKinsey Digital. Dostępny w Internecie: https://www. mckinsey. com/industries/high-tech/our-insights/what-digital-really-means. Ender, A., Attin, T., Mehl, A., 2016a. In vivo precision of conventional and digital methods of obtaining complete-arch dental impressions. J. Prosthet. Dent. 115, 313-320.
Ender, A., Mehl, A., 2013. Influence of scanning strategies on the accuracy of digital intraoral scanning systems. Int. J. Comput. Dent. 16, 11-21.
Ender, A., Mehl, A., 2015. In-vitro evaluation of the accuracy of conventional and digital methods of obtaining full-