Open Journal of Medical Imaging

Volume 10, Issue 3 (September 2020)

ISSN Print: 2164-2788   ISSN Online: 2164-2796

Google-based Impact Factor: 0.8  Citations  

Evaluation of the Accuracy of Digital Models Obtained Using Intraoral and Extraoral Scanners versus Gold Standard Plaster Model (Diagnostic Accuracy Study)

HTML  XML Download Download as PDF (Size: 573KB)  PP. 151-163  
DOI: 10.4236/ojmi.2020.103015    937 Downloads   2,508 Views  Citations

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Digital models showed promising results for orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. Digital models can be obtained from alginate impressions as well as direct intra-oral scanners. Studies assessing the accuracy of digital models have shown digital models to be valid, clinically acceptable, and more quickly obtainable. With the advent of new scanners with better scanning technology researches are necessary to evaluate their accuracy and reliability. Aim of Study: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of 3D digital models obtained through intraoral and extraoral scanning modalities to the reference gold standard plaster model. Material & Methods: Twenty-four adult male and female subjects were randomly selected for this study. The intraoral scanners evaluated in this study were Sirona (CEREC Omnicam) and 3 shape (TRIOS 3), while the laboratory scanners used were Sirona (inEos X5), and 3 shape (D850). Intra-oral scanning of the subjects and extra-oral scanning of their alginate impressions, plaster models of the alginate impression, rubber base impression, and plaster model of their rubber base impression were done. Linear dental measurements included intermolar width, interpremolar width, intercanine width, mesiodistal width of the 1st permanent molar, 1st premolar, canine and central incisor and arch width. All data were collected, tabulated and subjected to statistical analysis. Results: Small differences between the plaster and digital models were observed. Intra-observer reliability analysis for 14 out of the 16 measurements showed that all variables exhibited good to excellent reliability. Conclusions: There was no difference between the digitization using the intraoral scanner or the laboratory scanner. The most accurate digitization technique was the 3 Shape laboratory scanner of the cast of the alginate impression. The inEos X5 showed the highest error of digitization of the alginate and rubber base impressions.

Share and Cite:

Labib, M. , El-Beialy, A. and Attia, K. (2020) Evaluation of the Accuracy of Digital Models Obtained Using Intraoral and Extraoral Scanners versus Gold Standard Plaster Model (Diagnostic Accuracy Study). Open Journal of Medical Imaging, 10, 151-163. doi: 10.4236/ojmi.2020.103015.

Cited by

[1] Comparative Evaluation of Dimensional and Occlusal Accuracy of Non-Working Antagonist Casts: A Study on Different Impression Materials and 3D Printing
Makramani, ME Sayed… - … Medical Journal of …, 2023
[2] Evaluation of the Rate of En-masse Retraction in Orthodontic Patients with Maxillary Protrusion Using Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics: A Randomized Clinical …
Beialy, YA Mostafa, 2023
[3] Клінічна оцінка естетичних методів ортопедичного лікування пацієнтів із дефектами твердих тканин зубів
Вісник стоматології, 2023
[4] Diagnostic Accuracy of Plaster Vs Printed Models
Journal of Survey in …, 2023
[5] The Accuracy and Sensitivity of ABO's Electronic Cast Radiographic-Evaluation (CRE) Orthoshare 360 Program Measurement Compared to Traditional Manual CRE …
2022
[6] The Accuracy and Sensitivity of ABO Electronic Cast Radiographic Program ORTHOSHARE 360 Compared to Manual Measurements
2022
[7] Estado de la técnica de las impresiones dentales digitales en prostodoncia-Revisión Temática
2022
[8] Dimensional accuracy comparison of physical models generated by digital impression/3D-printing or analog impression/plaster methods
International journal …, 2021
[9] Comparación de Precisión Dimensional de Modelos Físicos Generados por Métodos de Impresión Digital/Impresión 3D o Impresión Analógica/Yeso
International journal of …, 2021
[10] ALLEY PROOF
Med Sci Monit, 2020

Copyright © 2025 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.