Digital era in oral rehabilitation: a scoping review of trends and implications for clinical practice.

Authors

Adriana da Fonte Porto Carreiro, Anne Kaline Claudino Ribeiro, Gülce Çakmak, Walter Yu Hang Lam, Wei-Shao Lin, Ji-Man Park, Murali Srinivasan, Manabu Kanazawa, Amirali Zandinejad, Burak Yilmaz

Published in

Brazilian oral research. Volume 40. Issue suppl 1. Pages e066. Epub Aug 21, 2026.

Abstract

This scoping review mapped the evidence on the clinical applicability and implications of digital workflows for fixed and removable full-arch rehabilitation in completely edentulous patients, focusing on workflow-related operational parameters and clinician-reported outcomes. This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR and was registered on the Open Science Framework. The research question was "What is the current evidence on digital workflows for full-arch rehabilitations and their implications for clinical practice?". A search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase, supplemented by grey literature and reference screening. The inclusion criteria were clinical studies and reviews focusing on the clinical implications of workflow-related performance indicators and the clinician's perceptions, considering the digital workflow. A descriptive analysis was conducted in terms of clinical application and key findings regarding accuracy, time-efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and clinician satisfaction. A total of 40 studies were included. The implant-level impressions demonstrated values for 3D linear deviations within clinically acceptable thresholds (up to 200 μm) and traditional methods remained feasible for tissue impressions due to the highest discrepancies found in the peripheral regions. The digital workflow was time- and cost-saving, ranging from 27.17% to 75.10% and 9.21% to 39.49%, respectively. The digital workflow was accurate for implant-level impressions. Evidence suggests limitations in peripheral and movable mucosa capture; however, certain protocols may improve reliability, and conventional methods remain important in specific clinical contexts. Moreover, it's time- and cost-efficient for interventions in completely edentulous patients, but the evidence remains scarce and inconclusive for clinician satisfaction.

PMID:
42659428
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 28 Aug 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Stats

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.