Robot technology in dentistry, part two of a systematic review

an overview of initiatives

Review (2021)
Author(s)

T.C.T. van Riet (Universiteit van Amsterdam, TU Delft - Learning & Autonomous Control, Amsterdam UMC)

Kevin T.H. Chin Jen Sem (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

Jean Pierre T.F. Ho (Amsterdam UMC, Universiteit van Amsterdam)

René Spijker (Amsterdam UMC)

J. Kober (TU Delft - Learning & Autonomous Control)

Jan de Lange (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

Research Group
Learning & Autonomous Control
Copyright
© 2021 T.C.T. van Riet, Kevin T.H. Chin Jen Sem, Jean Pierre T.F. Ho, René Spijker, J. Kober, Jan de Lange
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2021.06.002
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2021
Language
English
Copyright
© 2021 T.C.T. van Riet, Kevin T.H. Chin Jen Sem, Jean Pierre T.F. Ho, René Spijker, J. Kober, Jan de Lange
Research Group
Learning & Autonomous Control
Issue number
8
Volume number
37
Pages (from-to)
1227-1236
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Objectives: To provide dental practitioners and researchers with a comprehensive and transparent evidence-based overview of physical robot initiatives in all fields of dentistry. Data: Articles published since 1985 concerning primary data on physical robot technology in dentistry were selected. Characteristics of the papers were extracted such as the respective field of dentistry, year of publication as well as a description of its usage. Sources: Bibliographic databases PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched. A hand search through reference lists of all included articles was performed. Study selection: The search timeline was between January 1985 and October 2020. All types of scientific literature in all languages were included concerning fields of dentistry ranging from student training to implantology. Robot technology solely for the purpose of research and maxillofacial surgery were excluded. In total, 94 articles were included in this systematic review. Conclusions: This study provides a systematic overview of initiatives using robot technology in dentistry since its very beginning. While there were many interesting robot initiatives reported, the overall quality of the literature, in terms of clinical validation, is low. Scientific evidence regarding the benefits, results and cost-efficiency of commercially available robotic solutions in dentistry is lacking. The rise in availability of open source control systems, compliant robot systems and the design of dentistry-specific robot technology might facilitate the process of technological development in the near future. The authors are confident that robotics will provide useful solutions in the future but, strongly, encourage an evidence-based approach when adapting to new (robot) technology.