Comparison of conventional and digital workflow for dental rehabilitation with a novel patient-specific framework implant system: an experimental dataset evaluation

International Journal of Implant Dentistry

Table 1 Comparison of differences in teeth positioning between conventionally fabricated and digitally constructed dental prostheses with the original dentition

Point of measurement	Type of prosthesis	N	Mean* Median⁺ (mm)	Standard deviation (mm)	25%	75%	P-value
22	Conventional	25	1.691^*	0.513			0.146*
22	Digital	25	1.918^*	0.655			0.146*
23	Conventional	25	2.528^*	0.857			0.031*
23	Digital	25	3.397^*	1.522			0.031*
24 buccal	Conventional	25	2.820⁺		2.210	3.485	0.026⁺
24 buccal	Digital	25	3.330⁺		2.725	4.895	0.026⁺
24 palatal	Conventional	25	3.744^*	1.169			0.581*
24 palatal	Digital	25	3.997^*	1.891			0.581*
26 mesiobuccal	Conventional	25	2.520⁺		2.030	3.795	0.013⁺
26 mesiobuccal	Digital	25	3.910⁺		2.070	5.825	0.013⁺
26 distopalatal	Conventional	25	3.600^*	1.562			0.226*
26 distopalatal	Digital	25	4.320^*	2.611			0.226*
Total	Conventional	150	2.625⁺		1.967	3.720	< 0.001⁺
Total	Digital	150	3.140⁺		2.158	4.662	< 0.001⁺

*Paired t test; ⁺ Wilcoxon signed-rank test
The reconstruction in the molar teeth region was less precise than in the anterior teeth region (2.8–4.3 versus 1.7–3.4 mm)