Evaluate and Compare the Accuracy of Digital Dental Models Generated From Plaster Casts by Two Different Scanning TechniquesNCT05874947
Accuracy of Different Technologies for Dental Cast Digitization; CBCT Versus Desktop Optical 3D Scanner
An observational study of Evaluate and Compare the Accuracy of Digital Dental Models Generated From Plaster Casts by Two Different Scanning Techniques, run by Cairo University at 1 site in Egypt.
Trial summary
The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital dental models generated from plaster casts by two different scanning techniques including Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and extraoral Scanner (EOS) . Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any ageHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Evaluate and Compare the Accuracy of Digital Dental Models Generated From Plaster Casts by Two Different Scanning Techniques
- What is being tested?
- linear measurement
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteEgypt
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2020to 10 Sep 2022
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 Any age
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: Population selected for this study is any healthy male/female participant with complete set of non fractured maxillary or mandibular permanent teeth first molars included.
Who may be able to join
- Patients with maxillary or mandibular complete permanent dentition
- Partially edentulous patients provided the dentition are complete from the first molar to the first molar.
Who cannot join
- Patients with fractured teeth, attrition and/or erosion affecting the anatomical points
- Patients having non-anatomic restorations that may alter cusp anatomy affecting the accuracy of measurements consequently.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Accuracy of Different Technologies for Dental Cast Digitization; CBCT Versus Desktop Optical 3D Scanner: An Observational Study
The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital dental models generated from plaster casts by two different scanning techniques including Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and extraoral Scanner (EOS) .
The comparison between the two techniques is assessed by orthodontic arch space analysis using linear measurements for arch length and width .
- Being tested
- linear measurement
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
linear measurementDevice
Linear measurements from digital caliper ,CBCT and EOS generated digital dental models
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Dental Cast Digitization techniques:(CBCT 3D model scanning module ) | Scanning the plaster model using CBCT 3d model scanning module to generate a digital model Receives: Device: linear measurement | |
| Dental Cast Digitization techniques :Desktop Optical 3D Scanner | Scanning the plaster model using Desktop Optical 3D Scanner to generate a digital model Receives: Device: linear measurement | |
| plaster cast | linear measurments on the plaster cast as the gold standard (using the digital caliper ) Receives: Device: linear measurement |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Deviation of CBCT and extraoral scanner's measurements from gold standard in arch space analysis.
Evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital dental models generated from plaster casts by two different scanning techniques including Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and extraoral Scanner (EOS).
Measured: one year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted25 May 2023
- Study start1 Aug 2020
- Primary completion1 Jul 2022
- Study completion10 Sep 2022
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Evaluate and Compare the Accuracy of Digital Dental Models Generated From Plaster Casts by Two Different Scanning TechniquesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Cairo UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Maha Hamdy Mohammed Elfaramawy, Cairo University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05874947
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- radiology1
- Status last verified
- May 2023
- First submitted
- 16 May 2023
- Last updated
- 31 May 2023
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 May 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Accuracy of Different Technologies for Dental Cast Digitization; CBCT Versus Desktop Optical 3D Scanner: An Observational Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05874947
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- radiology1
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Cairo UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Sep 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 25 May 2023 (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.
The objective of this study is to evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital dental models generated from plaster casts by two different scanning techniques including Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and extraoral Scanner (EOS) .
The comparison between the two techniques is assessed by orthodontic arch space analysis using linear measurements for arch length and width .
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 3
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Dental Cast Digitization techniques:(CBCT 3D model scanning module ) | – | Device: linear measurementScanning the plaster model using CBCT 3d model scanning module to generate a digital model |
| Dental Cast Digitization techniques :Desktop Optical 3D Scanner | – | Device: linear measurementScanning the plaster model using Desktop Optical 3D Scanner to generate a digital model |
| plaster cast | – | Device: linear measurementlinear measurments on the plaster cast as the gold standard (using the digital caliper ) |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Population selected for this study is any healthy male/female participant with complete set of non fractured maxillary or mandibular permanent teeth first molars included.
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients with maxillary or mandibular complete permanent dentition
- Partially edentulous patients provided the dentition are complete from the first molar to the first molar.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients with fractured teeth, attrition and/or erosion affecting the anatomical points
- Patients having non-anatomic restorations that may alter cusp anatomy affecting the accuracy of measurements consequently.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| linear measurementLinear measurements from digital caliper ,CBCT and EOS generated digital dental models | Device | Dental Cast Digitization techniques :Desktop Optical 3D Scanner, Dental Cast Digitization techniques:(CBCT 3D model scanning module ), plaster cast |
Primary outcome
Deviation of CBCT and extraoral scanner's measurements from gold standard in arch space analysis.
Time frame: one year
Evaluate and compare the accuracy of digital dental models generated from plaster casts by two different scanning techniques including Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) and extraoral Scanner (EOS).
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 31 May 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Evaluate and Compare the Accuracy of Digital Dental Models Generated From Plaster Casts by Two Different Scanning Techniques, run by Cairo University at 1 site in Egypt.
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 2 inclusion and 2 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 31 May 2023. 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 Egypt. 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?
Deviation of CBCT and extraoral scanner's measurements from gold standard in arch space analysis. (time frame: one year). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 31 May 2023.