Digital Technique

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 297 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Jeno Kisch - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • intraoral Digital impression Technique compared to conventional impression Technique a randomized clinical trial
    Journal of Prosthodontics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Björn Gjelvold, Eva Karin Korduner, Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic, Ingrid Collinbagewitz, Jeno Kisch
    Abstract:

    Purpose To compare Digital and conventional impression Techniques in a randomized clinical trial; specifically, procedure times, patient-centered outcomes, and clinical evaluation of the restorations. Materials and Methods Forty-two patients in need of tooth-supported single crowns and/or fixed partial prostheses up to six units were randomly allocated to one of the impression Techniques. The procedure times, dentists’ and patients’ assessments using a visual analog scale (VAS), and clinical evaluation of the restorations were compared between the two groups. Results The mean total procedure times for Digital and conventional impression Technique were 14:33 ± 5:27 and 20:42 ± 5:42, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean impression times were 7:33 ± 3.37 and 11:33 ± 1.56, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the dentist's assessment of difficulty (0 to 100; very difficult = 100) were 24.00 ± 18.02 and 48.02 ± 21.21, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the patients’ assessment of discomfort (0 to 100; very discomforting = 100) was 6.50 ± 5.87 and 44.86 ± 27.13, respectively (p < 0.0001). Occlusal contacts showed a better result for the Digital Technique. Conclusion The results of this study demonstrated that the Digital Technique was more efficient and convenient than the conventional impression Technique.

  • Intraoral Digital Impression Technique Compared to Conventional Impression Technique. A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Journal of Prosthodontics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Björn Gjelvold, Eva Karin Korduner, Ingrid Collin-bagewitz, Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic, Jeno Kisch
    Abstract:

    © 2015 by the American College of Prosthodontists Purpose: To compare Digital and conventional impression Techniques in a randomized clinical trial; specifically, procedure times, patient-centered outcomes, and clinical evaluation of the restorations. Materials and Methods: Forty-two patients in need of tooth-supported single crowns and/or fixed partial prostheses up to six units were randomly allocated to one of the impression Techniques. The procedure times, dentists’ and patients’ assessments using a visual analog scale (VAS), and clinical evaluation of the restorations were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean total procedure times for Digital and conventional impression Technique were 14:33 ± 5:27 and 20:42 ± 5:42, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean impression times were 7:33 ± 3.37 and 11:33 ± 1.56, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the dentist's assessment of difficulty (0 to 100; very difficult = 100) were 24.00 ± 18.02 and 48.02 ± 21.21, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the patients’ assessment of discomfort (0 to 100; very discomforting = 100) was 6.50 ± 5.87 and 44.86 ± 27.13, respectively (p < 0.0001). Occlusal contacts showed a better result for the Digital Technique. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrated that the Digital Technique was more efficient and convenient than the conventional impression Technique.

Jinsung Choi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Björn Gjelvold - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • intraoral Digital impression Technique compared to conventional impression Technique a randomized clinical trial
    Journal of Prosthodontics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Björn Gjelvold, Eva Karin Korduner, Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic, Ingrid Collinbagewitz, Jeno Kisch
    Abstract:

    Purpose To compare Digital and conventional impression Techniques in a randomized clinical trial; specifically, procedure times, patient-centered outcomes, and clinical evaluation of the restorations. Materials and Methods Forty-two patients in need of tooth-supported single crowns and/or fixed partial prostheses up to six units were randomly allocated to one of the impression Techniques. The procedure times, dentists’ and patients’ assessments using a visual analog scale (VAS), and clinical evaluation of the restorations were compared between the two groups. Results The mean total procedure times for Digital and conventional impression Technique were 14:33 ± 5:27 and 20:42 ± 5:42, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean impression times were 7:33 ± 3.37 and 11:33 ± 1.56, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the dentist's assessment of difficulty (0 to 100; very difficult = 100) were 24.00 ± 18.02 and 48.02 ± 21.21, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the patients’ assessment of discomfort (0 to 100; very discomforting = 100) was 6.50 ± 5.87 and 44.86 ± 27.13, respectively (p < 0.0001). Occlusal contacts showed a better result for the Digital Technique. Conclusion The results of this study demonstrated that the Digital Technique was more efficient and convenient than the conventional impression Technique.

  • Intraoral Digital Impression Technique Compared to Conventional Impression Technique. A Randomized Clinical Trial
    Journal of Prosthodontics, 2016
    Co-Authors: Björn Gjelvold, Eva Karin Korduner, Ingrid Collin-bagewitz, Bruno Ramos Chrcanovic, Jeno Kisch
    Abstract:

    © 2015 by the American College of Prosthodontists Purpose: To compare Digital and conventional impression Techniques in a randomized clinical trial; specifically, procedure times, patient-centered outcomes, and clinical evaluation of the restorations. Materials and Methods: Forty-two patients in need of tooth-supported single crowns and/or fixed partial prostheses up to six units were randomly allocated to one of the impression Techniques. The procedure times, dentists’ and patients’ assessments using a visual analog scale (VAS), and clinical evaluation of the restorations were compared between the two groups. Results: The mean total procedure times for Digital and conventional impression Technique were 14:33 ± 5:27 and 20:42 ± 5:42, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean impression times were 7:33 ± 3.37 and 11:33 ± 1.56, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the dentist's assessment of difficulty (0 to 100; very difficult = 100) were 24.00 ± 18.02 and 48.02 ± 21.21, respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean VAS scores for the patients’ assessment of discomfort (0 to 100; very discomforting = 100) was 6.50 ± 5.87 and 44.86 ± 27.13, respectively (p < 0.0001). Occlusal contacts showed a better result for the Digital Technique. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrated that the Digital Technique was more efficient and convenient than the conventional impression Technique.

J Vilain - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • a direct Digital Technique implementation of general discontinuous pulse width modulation strategy
    IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2011
    Co-Authors: J Hobraiche, Nicolas Patin, Guy Friedrich, J Vilain
    Abstract:

    This paper presents direct Digital Technique-generalized discontinuous pulse width modulation (PWM) - a new implementation method for an optimal discontinuous PWM (DPWM) in terms of switching losses of the inverter on an embedded system. At each sampling period, an optimal choice is done in order to clamp one of the three half-bridges. Its advantages compared to classic ones (DPWM) are as follows: needless to know the load power factor, operational under steady-state and dynamic operating conditions, and low computation time. The proposed algorithm is then verified by simulation. Experimental results, based on a resistance-inductance load and a starter-generator application, are provided to show its effectiveness.

C.-h. Jeong - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • A combined analog-Digital Technique for normalizing video signals for the detection of moving objects
    [Proceedings] ICASSP-92: 1992 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing, 1992
    Co-Authors: G.w. Donohoe, C.-h. Jeong
    Abstract:

    Some applications of machine vision, such as surveillance and traffic monitoring, require a system that operates without human adjustment under changing scene conditions. Such a system should adaptively condition the analog video signal to maximize the detection of interesting events. An information measure based on the probability of detection is introduced, and an adaptive scheme to manipulate the analog signal to optimize the information measure and maximize the likelihood of detection is presented.