Evaluating usability of and satisfaction with two types of dental CAD software

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the usability of and satisfaction with two types of computer-aided design (CAD) software among users who had experience with dental implant CAD software and those who did not. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Dental technicians (n = 20) who had previous experience with dental implant CAD Software and students from the College of Dentistry (n = 12) who had never designed implant custom abutments were asked to evaluate two types of CAD Software, Exocad and Deltanine. In addition, the participants were asked to fill out a structured questionnaire (Section 1 Entering basic information and retrieving files; Section 2 Setting conditions before abutment design; Section 3 Setting abutment design; and Section 4 Overall satisfaction). For the statistical analysis of the collected data, Mann-Whitney U test was used (α = .05). RESULTS: The ease of design and satisfaction with the implant CAD Software, evaluated with respect to 21 statements divided into four Stages, were significantly higher for Exocad in both groups for Secion 1. For Sections 2 and 3, participants with experience evaluated Deltanine to be significantly better. For Section 4, both groups evaluated Exocad Software to be better. CONCLUSION: Overall, the Exocad Software was evaluated as having better usability and offering greater satisfaction. However, in terms of performance in the core of the design process, i.e. Sections 2 and 3, Deltanine was rated higher by the experienced users. Thus, if the user interface design parts are supplemented, Deltanine CAD Software could be put to a wider use in clinics.