Background: The objective of this study was to investigate the experience of Saudi dental practitioners with intraoral scanners, investigate the current knowledge and improve the practice accordingly. Methods: At random, electronic surveys were distributed to Saudi dental practitioners. The study received 400 questionnaires, with 310 judged valid for the study. The questionnaire was divided into the following sections: (i) Practitioners' demographic information such as gender, practice level, and practice experience. (ii) Experience and benefits of intraoral scanners. (iii) Require skills and training of IOS. (iv) Knowledge of IOS usage. Descriptive statistics such as numbers and percentages were used to analyze the collected data. The Chi-square and Fisher's Exact tests were used to assess the results. Results: There were 161 women (51.8%) and 149 men among the participants (47.9%). General practitioners (198, or 63.7%) had the most subjects, followed by specialists (80, or 25.7%) and consultants (32, or 10.3%). In terms of IOS use in dental practice, most participants (70.6%) do not use it, while less than one-third do. The majority of participants (52.3%) intend to purchase IOS with significant variations based on gender, experience, and level of practice (p<0.05). Compared to traditional, most participants believe that IOS will eventually replace it, improve quality, and be more aesthetically pleasing. Most dentists believe that using IOS requires special skills and training. More than half of dentists believe IOSs have the same level of accuracy as conventional in producing three units FPDs, implant prosthesis, and complete denture. Conclusion: It can be concluded that dentists have a high level of satisfaction and a favorable attitude toward using IOS technology in clinical dentistry practice.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The Ethics Committee of Scientific Research, University of Hail, Saudi Arabia, approved the protocol of this study. All methods were performed in accordance with the declaration of Helsinki. (Ethical number: H-2021-148).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files