# Accuracy, Time, and Comfort of Different Intraoral Scanners: An In Vivo Comparison Study
## 3 Results
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Upper**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Trios Cast (T)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Element Cast (E)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Lumina Cast (L)**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**F**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\(p\)} & \multirow{2}{*}{**T vs. E**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**T vs. L**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**E vs. L**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-10}  & **M** & & & & & & & & & \(p\) & \(p\) & \(p\) \\ \hline Upper 17–27 & 51.2 & 1.6 & 48.4 & 1.3 & 47.6 & 1.4 & 3.748 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Upper 16–26 & 42.6 & 1.5 & 40.6 & 2.3 & 41.4 & 1.7 & 1.462 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Upper 15–25 & 36.8 & 1.6 & 35.6 & 1.1 & 35.4 & 0.9 & 1.792 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Upper 14–24 & 32.8 & 1.3 & 31.8 & 1.3 & 31 & 1.5 & 2.068 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Upper 13–23 & 30.4 & 1.3 & 29.6 & 2.9 & 29.2 & 2.6 & 0.226 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 11 & 9.2 & 1.3 & 7.4 & 0.9 & 7.8 & 0.8 & 4.186 & * & * & * & NS \\ Mesiodistal 12 & 6.0 & 0.8 & 5.3 & 1.4 & 4.7 & 1.7 & 1.007 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 13 & 7.2 & 0.8 & 6.0 & 0.7 & 6.6 & 1.0 & 2.700 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 14 & 7.4 & 1.5 & 7.2 & 0.8 & 7.2 & 1.3 & 0.433 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 15 & 7.5 & 0.8 & 7.8 & 2.0 & 6.8 & 1.6 & 1.330 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 16 & 10.6 & 0.5 & 9.6 & 0.8 & 9.1 & 0.8 & 1.882 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 17 & 9.8 & 0.8 & 8.6 & 1.1 & 8.8 & 1.3 & 1.675 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 21 & 7.7 & 0.8 & 6.4 & 0.9 & 6.8 & 0.8 & 4.222 & * & * & * & NS \\ Mesiodistal 22 & 5.7 & 0.5 & 5.2 & 0.7 & 5.4 & 1.1 & 3.111 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 23 & 7.8 & 0.7 & 6.6 & 1.2 & 6.6 & 1.0 & 2.182 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 24 & 7.2 & 1.2 & 6.7 & 0.7 & 6.4 & 1.4 & 1.152 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 25 & 7.8 & 0.8 & 6.4 & 0.5 & 6.2 & 0.3 & 1.441 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 26 & 10.4 & 0.5 & 9.6 & 0.9 & 9.2 & 0.8 & 3.111 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ Mesiodistal 27 & 9.6 & 1.0 & 8.8 & 0.8 & 8.4 & 0.9 & 1.697 & NS & NS & NS & NS \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Descriptive statistics and statistical analysis for upper dental casts. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**iTero Element**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**iTero Lumina**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Difference**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**95\% Confidence**} \\ \cline{2-2} \cline{5-10}  & **M** & **SD** & **M** & **SD** & & & **Lower** & **Upper** \\ \hline Q1: “Comfort” & 5.1 & 0.9 & 7.3 & 1.3 & ** & -2.2 & \(-3.2\) & \(-1.2\) \\ Q2: “Stress” & 2.5 & 1.1 & 2.3 & 1.2 & NS & 0.2 & \(-0.9\) & \(1.3\) \\ Q3: “Pain” & 4.1 & 1.0 & 2.6 & 0.9 & ** & 1.5 & 0.6 & \(2.4\) \\ Q4: “Mouth dryness” & 4.6 & 1.1 & 4.3 & 1.0 & NS & 0.3 & \(-0.7\) & \(1.3\) \\ Q5: “Gag reflex” & 4.5 & 2.8 & 3.8 & 2.6 & NS & 0.7 & \(-19\) & \(3.3\) \\ Q6: “Experience” & 7.2 & 0.9 & 8.4 & 1.2 & * & \(-1.2\) & \(-2.2\) & \(0.2\) \\ Q7: “Duration” & 6.1 & 0.8 & 8.1 & 0.7 & *** & \(-2.0\) & \(-2.8\) & \(-1.2\) \\ Q8: “Technology” & 6.0 & 1.1 & 7.9 & 0.8 & ** & \(-1.9\) & \(-2.8\) & \(-0.9\) \\ Q9: “Communication” & 6.1 & 0.7 & 7.0 & 1.1 & * & \(-0.9\) & \(-1.8\) & \(-0.1\) \\ Q10: “General satisfaction” & 8.1 & 0.7 & 8.9 & 0.4 & * & \(-0.8\) & \(-1.5\) & \(-0.1\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Satisfaction survey responses for iTero Element and iTero Lumina. increased satisfaction with iTero Lumina compared to Element (\(p<0.5\)). No significant differences were detected between the two IOSs in terms of dryness of the mouth and gag reflex.