ABSTRACT
Objective In recent years, digital processes like computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacture (CAD/CAM) have been implemented in dentistry. On the use and reporting of this technology by dentists, there is no published information. The goal of this study was to determine whether CAD/CAM technology had infiltrated Indian dentistry practices and to look into the relationship between various demographic parameters and respondents' answers about using or not using this technology. Materials and methods A sample of Indian dentists, both users and non-users of CAD/CAM, were sent about 500 online surveys. It sought to shed light on the usage style, materials, advantages, and limitations of CAD/CAM dentistry, as well as their perceived advantages and access hurdles. Statistical analysis was conducted to determine the impact of numerous demographic factors, including country of employment, dentist experience, educational attainment, and the nature of the job. Results There were 132 total replies that were finished. The majority of respondents didn't use any aspect of a digital workflow, and the biggest obstacles to using CAD/CAM were the upfront expenses and a lack of perceived advantages over traditional techniques. The likelihood of using CAD/CAM technology was highest among dentists who primarily performed private practice (P<0.0001). A third of users thought that their training was insufficient, even though the majority of users were either self-taught or schooled by firms. The majority of respondents (60.6%) believed that CAD/CAM would have a significant future role. Conclusion Most respondents said they had never used any aspect of a digital process. Although most dentists who responded to the study thought CAD/CAM would play a significant role in the future, the majority were still interested in integrating it into their workflow. Dentists continue to have certain concerns regarding the chairside CAD/CAM restorations' quality.
ABSTRACT
AIM: The purpose of the study is to evaluate and compare the horizontal mandibular positions recorded between intraoral conventional tracer and intraoral digital tracer in upright and supine position. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-four edentulous patients with well-formed ridge and adequate interarch distance space were selected. MATLAB software was assimilated with intraoral digital tracer and was utilized in the study for recording the horizontal movements of the mandible, i.e., gothic arch tracing by intraoral digital tracer and was observed on a laptop with the help of MATLAB Software. For each subject, multiple mandibular readings were recorded and analyzed through software, and similar readings were recorded with conventional intraoral tracers. The comparison between intraoral conventional tracer and intraoral digital tracer was done to assess the reliability. Moreover, the consistency of recording horizontal mandibular position was also compared between upright and supine position. RESULTS: The data were procured and utilized in comparison for different positions revealed statistically significant difference by using Student's Paired t-test. The test resulted in supine position better compared to upright position (P = 0.0001). The association between supine position with upright position was calculated using Fischer's exact test, and it was also found to be statistically significant (P = 0.002). The Pearson's Correlation analysis was performed to check the agreement between upright and supine position and very weak downhill correlation (r 2= -0.130) was observed between the two variables. CONCLUSION: On evaluation and comparison of horizontal mandibular position, it was found that the intraoral digital tracing technique is more valid compared to conventional intraoral tracer technique. It was also observed that the consistency of reproducibility in recording horizontal mandibular position in supine position is significantly higher than upright position.
