At a glance
ClinicalIndex Comparison RecordStandardized by ClinicalIndex from the ClinicalTrials.gov record · verify against the source.
3D Ear Scanner-Workflow Timing and Preferences Compared to Traditional Silicone Earmold Impressions
In Brief
An observational study evaluating 3D ear scanner and Conventional silicon ear impressions for Ear Mold Impression Procedure. Completed, enrolled 30 participants across 1 site.
Detailed Summary
Study participants will undergo ear canal impressions in a standard of care protocol utilizing two methodologies: 3D ear scanning using a commercially-available ear scanning device, and conventional silicone impression material. The elapsed time of each procedure will be captured for each participant, and the average duration of the two methodologies will be compared.
Study Details
Timeline
Interventions
A commercially-available ear scanning device used according to standard of care. A hand-held device is used and is considered less invasive than conventional earmold impressions.
A two part silicon impression material that is used to fill the ear and produce a physical cast of the ear canal. The procedure is standard of care.