Evaluation of digital and traditional impressions in orthodontics: a narrative review
Authors
Sabina Saccomanno, Lorenzo Ederli Silenzi, Mario Palermiti, Simone Ettore Salvati, Daniela Di Giandomenico, Eda Fani, Giuseppe Marzo
Abstract
Objective: This narrative review explores the clinical, technical, and patient centered differences between digital and traditional dental impression techniques, focusing on their role in orthodontics. Background: Dental impressions are essential in orthodontic diagnostics and treatment. The introduction of digital intraoral scanners has transformed clinical workflows, offering improved patient experience and potential efficiency gains. Traditional analog methods remain valuable due to their simplicity and affordability. Methods: A non-systematic literature review was conducted via PubMed using the keywords “digital impression,” “dental impression,” and “orthodontics.” Studies within the last 10 years that compared digital and analog methods were selected for thematic synthesis. Results and Discussion: Digital impressions demonstrated notable benefits in terms of patient comfort, particularly for pediatric and anxious patients. Accuracy was comparable or superior to conventional methods, and digital workflows offered enhanced efficiency and data integration. However, the initial costs and learning curve for digital systems were significant. Traditional impressions, while more technique-sensitive and less comfortable, remain cost-effective and clinically adequate in many scenarios. Conclusions: Digital and analog impression techniques each have distinct strengths and limitations. The choice should be tailored to patient needs, clinical context, and available resources. A hybrid strategy may optimize outcomes.
PDF
