Internet Explorer is not supported
Sorry, please use another browser such as Google Chrome or MozillaFirefox

Clinical studies

3Shape TRIOS® has been included in a wealth of independent clinical studies. These studies focus on everything from accuracy to comparing conventional and digital workflows and include both in-vitro and in-vivo analysis.

Selected clinical studies

Occlusal adjustment of 3-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses fabricated with complete-digital and -analog workflows: A crossover clinical trial

Karasan et al. Dentistry Journal. 2023
This prospective crossover clinical trial aimed to compare the complete-digital and -analog workflows in terms of occlusal adjustment of 3-unit tooth-supported fixed dental prostheses, operator, and patient preferences.

A reverse digital workflow by using an interim restoration scan and patient-specific motion with an intraoral scanner

Valenti et al. J Prosthet Dent. 2020
"This digital workflow is a reliable and efficient treatment option, as it improves restoration quality by reducing errors."

Accuracy and precision of 3 intraoral scanners and accuracy of conventional impressions: A novel in vivo analysis method

Nedelcu et al. J Dent. 2018
"TRIOS had a higher accuracy than OMNIcam. Intraoral scanners can be used as a replacement for conventional impressions."

Accuracy of crowns based on digital intraoral scanning compared to conventional impression

Haddadi et al. Clin Oral Investig. 2019
"Crowns based on TRIOS show statistically significantly better marginal and internal adaptation before cementation compared to conventional impression."

Precision of Nine Intra-Oral Digital Scanners and Four Lab Digital Scanners 

Nulty et al. Dentistry Journal. 2021.
Study confirms TRIOS 3 and 4 confirm as accurate as Primescan and statistically more accurate than Omnicam, Runyes and Launca DL206 IOS.

Three-dimensional differences between intraoral scans and conventional impressions of edentulous jaws: A clinical study

Lo Russo et al. J Prosthet Dent 2019
"Intraoral scans of edentulous jaws are feasible, and their accuracy is not significantly different from that of conventional impressions, either clinically or statistically."

Trueness and precision of intraoral scanners in the maxillary dental arch: an in vivo analysis

Winkler et al. Sci Rep. 2020
"The overall difference of the median precision measurements between the two scanners was approximately 10 μm (0.0098 mm). However, the lowest precision was detected for TRIOS 3 scans of a specific patient."

Automated Caries Detection using a 3D Intraoral Scanner. An in Vivo Validation Study

Michou et al. 2021 Scientific Reports
The use of 3D intraoral scanners (IOS) and software that can support automated detection and objective monitoring of oral diseases such as caries, tooth wear or periodontal diseases is increasingly receiving attention from researchers and industry. This study clinically validates an automated caries scoring system for occlusal caries detection and classification, previously developed for an IOS system featuring fluorescence (TRIOS 4, 3Shape TRIOS A/S, Denmark).

More clinical studies

This was just a selection of clinical studies comparing digital with conventional impression taking methods. Want to dig deeper into what the research says about accuracy, edentulous scanning, face scanning, full arch, gingiva or marginal fit when intraoral scanning?
Our library with clinical studies contains hundreds of studies. Each study is summarized in a one-pager with the title, authors, reference, a link to the full article online and a summary of the objective, methods, results and conclusions where applicable. Studies will be added continuously.

Browse full library