Accuracy of Conventional Impression Versus Intraoral Scanner in Capturing Three Different Nasal Defects
- Conditions
- Nasal Defect
- Interventions
- Device: Physical ImpressionDevice: Scanning using intraoral scanner without markersDevice: Scanning using intraoral scanner with markers
- Registration Number
- NCT06315621
- Lead Sponsor
- Cairo University
- Brief Summary
For all participants, a conventional facial impression will be done using silicone material then poured and scanned using a desktop scanner which represented the control group (Group 1).
Group 2, involves nasal defects which will be optically scanned using IOS(medit 700 wireless) without facial markers Group 3 involves nasal defects which will be optically scanned using IOS(medit 700 wireless) with facial markers.
STL files of the facial scans and scanned cast obtained from the impression will be exported and saved to be used later for outcome assessment.
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 15
- isolated nasal defects either, total or subtotal.
- congenitally missing external nose with healthy and intact remaining facial structures.
- Any debilitating medical condition.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- PARALLEL
- Arm && Interventions
Group Intervention Description Physical impression Physical Impression - Scanning using intraoral scanner without markers Scanning using intraoral scanner without markers - Scanning using Intraoral scanner with markers Scanning using intraoral scanner with markers -
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Dimensional accuracy of intraoral scanners Day 0 measuring dimensional accuracy of diffrent scanning techniques using intraoral scanners
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Cairo University
🇪🇬Cairo, Egypt