Does the Learning Curve for Intraoral Scanning Vary Depending on the Device?

OBJECTIVES

Digital impressions using intraoral scanners (IOS) are replacing conventional impressions, requiring a learning process. This study compared the learning curves of 29 dentists with no prior IOS experience, randomly assigned to groups: Eagle, Omnicam- AF, and IS-3700.

METHODS

After a lecture, participants performed three full scans (maxilla, mandible, and occlusion record) on a phantom and completed a survey about their experience. Scanning times to achieve adequate scans were recorded, and Wright's model was used to estimate the number of trials required for proficiency. Statistical analyses used Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-Square tests.

RESULTS

Proficiency was achieved after 10 trials with Eagle and 11 trials with Omnicam-AF and IS-3700. Participants using IS- 3700 reached the plateau faster (167.9 s) than those using Eagle (245.5 s, P=0.041) and Omnicam-AF (260.6 s, P=0.014). While all groups appreciated the time-saving benefits over conventional impressions, 60-70% identified the need for further training.

CONCLUSION

Despite similar trials required for proficiency, differences in average scanning times suggest that IOS characteristics may influence learning efficiency and user perceptions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding learning curves and device-specific performance can help optimize IOS training programs and guide clinicians in adopting digital workflows effectively.