目的:为了确定是否使用单个或组合的机械和虚拟咬合架,以及脸弓,下巴运动跟踪器,面部扫描仪,和相关设备,实际上提高了假体在寿命和患者相关结局方面的疗效.为了尝试分析模拟和数字虚拟患者(AVP和DVP),澄清和综合与以前所谓的设备相关的术语和工作流程。
方法:完成了涉及不同数据库的范围审查。遵循系统审查和荟萃分析(PRISMA-ScR)清单和JBI指南的首选报告项目,以提取有关人口的数据。背景和概念建立。
结果:关于使用与AVP和DVP工作流程相关的设备和技术的功效的现有文献显示了有争议的研究设计,巨大的异质性,和可疑的质量。
结论:术语AVP和DVP已被创造为第一步,以阐明和简化与使用机械和虚拟咬合架有关的概念和工作流程,以及脸弓,或者面部和口内扫描仪,在其他人中。此范围审查不能声称AVP方法导致更有效和高效的假体修复。
To determine whether the use of single or combined mechanical and virtual articulators, as well as facebows, jaw motion trackers, face scanners, and related devices, actually improve the efficacy of the prosthesis obtained in terms of lifespan and patient-related outcomes. To coin the terms Analogic and Digital Virtual Patients (AVP and DVP) as an attempt to analyze, clarify and synthesize terminology and workflows related to previously so-called devices.
A scoping review was accomplished involving different databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA-ScR) checklist and JBI guidance were followed to extract data regarding the Population, Context and Concept established.
Available literature on the efficacy of using devices and techniques related to both AVP and DVP workflows showed arguable study designs, great heterogeneity, and questionable quality.
The terms AVP and DVP have been coined as a first step to clarify and simplify concepts and workflows related to the use of both mechanical and virtual articulators, as well as facebows, or facial and intraoral scanners, among others. This scoping review cannot claim that an AVP approach leads to more effective and efficient prosthetic restorations.