Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Digital vs. conventional implant prosthetic workflows: a cost/time analysis

2014; Wiley; Volume: 26; Issue: 12 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/clr.12476

1600-0501

Tim Joda, Urs Brägger,

Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty

Abstract Objectives The aim of this prospective cohort trial was to perform a cost/time analysis for implant‐supported single‐unit reconstructions in the digital workflow compared to the conventional pathway. Materials and Methods A total of 20 patients were included for rehabilitation with 2 × 20 implant crowns in a crossover study design and treated consecutively each with customized titanium abutments plus CAD / CAM ‐zirconia‐suprastructures (test: digital) and with standardized titanium abutments plus PFM ‐crowns (control conventional). Starting with prosthetic treatment, analysis was estimated for clinical and laboratory work steps including measure of costs in Swiss Francs ( CHF ), productivity rates and cost minimization for first‐line therapy. Statistical calculations were performed with Wilcoxon signed‐rank test . Results Both protocols worked successfully for all test and control reconstructions. Direct treatment costs were significantly lower for the digital workflow 1815.35 CHF compared to the conventional pathway 2119.65 CHF [ P = 0.0004]. For subprocess evaluation, total laboratory costs were calculated as 941.95 CHF for the test group and 1245.65 CHF for the control group, respectively [ P = 0.003]. The clinical dental productivity rate amounted to 29.64 CHF / min (digital) and 24.37 CHF / min (conventional) [ P = 0.002]. Overall, cost minimization analysis exhibited an 18% cost reduction within the digital process. Conclusion The digital workflow was more efficient than the established conventional pathway for implant‐supported crowns in this investigation.